1

The Cutter The �ewsletter of the Foundation for Coast Guard History

28 Osprey Dr.

�ewsletter 30, Summer 2010 Gales Ferry, CT 06335

Bill of Lading From the Chairman:

As I write this letter to the membership, I am struck by the enormity of the challenges the Coast Guard is facing—and the history that is being made—as our service responds to the largest maritime environmental disaster our nation has ever experienced. I am proud to say that the Coast Guard is recording the events from an historical perspective, and Dr. Bob Browning, the Coast Guard Historian, is doing his best to preserve our heritage as it unfolds. This sounds like busi-ness as usual, but it is not: for far too long the Coast Guard has dealt with events from a public relations perspective, but has not taken the time—for any number of reasons, in-cluding budget and personnel—to do the work necessary to preserve information. Kudos go to the Coast Guard in making this investment; but more needs to be done, as Dr. Browning will attest. I can report good news: membership is growing! Both ADM Papp, the new Commandant, and ADM Allen, the “National Incident Commander” for the Deepwater Hori-zon Spill, are life members of our organization. I encourage you all to become life members and to solicit new members at every opportunity. The cause is worthy, and the discov-ery of our past heritage is exciting. On the publishing front, VADM Thorsen is finished with the final edits on the “coffee table” book, The Coast Guard. It will be available later this fall, so watch for the an-nouncement on our web page. The present edition is out of date, yet on EBay it is selling for more than the original purchase price—so get your checkbooks ready. Every copy sold will benefit our organization. Thanks to all who helped make this possible. VADM Thorsen’s

Continued on page 2

Wardroom

From the Chairman p. 1 From the Executive Director p. 2 From the Chairman Emeritus p. 4 From the Editor p. 5 Herzberg Receives DPSA p. 5 FCGH Annual Awards p. 7

Main Prop

The First RCS Officers p. 8 Sandy Hook p. 14 CG AirSta Salem MA p. 19 A Christmas Miracle 1943 p. 21 Shutdown of Loran System pp. 21, 22, 23 FN Eddie Hernandez p. 25

Speakings

LT Herbert M. Collins p. 25 Seymour Wittek p. 27 Charles Johnson p. 29 Arthur Frenzel p. 29

Message Board

FRC Bernard Webber p. 30 Kennedy MPSA for CG36500 p. 30 Strobridge DPSA p. 31 Hall of Heroes 2010 p. 31

Culbertson LE Memorial p. 35

2

article in this edition of the Cutter will add to your interest, and I will provide more on this when the book is on the shelves. Our strategic plan is just about ready to go. We’ll make some final edits and changes, and then both the Regents and general member-ship will review what has been put together. We are looking for strategic partnerships that will enhance Coast Guard History and expand our reach and influence. Ties to the Coast Guard Foundation, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, Coast Guard Training Centers and the Coast Guard Reserve as well as our established rela-tionship with the Coast Guard Academy are all being pursued. In addition, Dr. Browning has asked our organization to assist him as he struggles to do his work. We will report on all these efforts in the next Cutter. Stay tuned, because these are exciting times. I keep talking about the future, yet our organi-zation is all about the past. Enjoy this edition as it delves into new and interesting details of the “genetics” of our history. It takes commitment to volunteer and be part of something significant. I appreciate your support and look forward to any and all sug-gestions. The stars are shining brightly, we know where we’re headed—“Steady as she goes.” Jim Hull, VADM USCG (ret.) From the Executive Director:

As VADM Hull noted in his column, we once again find ourselves compiling this edition of the Cutter, about Coast Guard history, even as the Coast Guard is again engaged in making history. This isn’t really surprising, consider-ing our past, but it is still impressive to see all elements of the Coast Guard—active duty, reserve, auxiliary and civilians (even USCG Academy cadets are assigned to units in-volved

Wardroom

Bill of Lading – Traditional meaning: the basic document

of a cargo-conveying sea vessel, showing receipt of the

goods carried. In the Cutter: Table of Contents.

Main Prop – Traditional meaning: short for main propul-

sion -- under sail or steam, this is the primary means of

making the ship go. In the Cutter: feature articles.

The Wardroom – Traditional meaning: the space where

necessary ship’s business might be conducted. In the

Cutter: FCGH affairs.

Speakings – Traditional meaning: in the days of sail, with

no long-range communications, ships passing would

“speak” each other, exchanging port info and news from

shore. In the Cutter: passages and transitions -- of ships,

the “Ancients,” and people.

Memorials – Traditional meaning: a statement of facts

addressed to the government, usually accompanied by a

petition or remonstrance. In the Cutter: updated news on

maritime museums and memorials – usually accompa-

nied by a petition for support!

The Message Board – Traditional meaning: on naval

ships, paper copies of message traffic were routed for the

eyes of those with a need to know. In the Cutter: reprints

of relevant CG messages.

In the Offing -- Traditional meaning: this referred to com-

ing over the horizon from the deep sea to approach the

land. In the Cutter: notices of upcoming events.

Off-Duty -- Traditional meaning: not on watch; time to

relax. In the Cutter: book and movie reviews and recom-

mendations.

Baggywrinkle -- Traditional meaning: bits and pieces of

old line gathered together to fill a spot where gear might

otherwise chafe. In the Cutter: interesting historical odd-

ments used as filler.

Note on Baggywrinkle - Except as otherwise identified,

all items of Baggywrinkle are from ‘Some Unusual Inci-

dents in Coast Guard History,” Historical Section, Public

Information Division, CGHQ, 1950

�omenclature regarding content Continued from front page

3

in operations)—fully engaged in the making of the history that our children and their chil-dren will read about in the pages of the Cutter years from now. You’ll read wonderful articles about some recent award recipients, including our own Fred Herzberg, CAPT USCG (ret.) and our organization’s founder, along with VADM Howard Thorsen. In reading their stories, you’ll see why I believe that history becomes real when you participate: from the work of these individuals, the history of the Coast Guard is better preserved and more widely known and shared. You’ll also see that the Coast Guard is making a strong effort to fill what many believe to be a “hole” in our high-lighting of our history of recognition by nam-ing our newest class of cutters after our enlisted heroes. You’ll also find a bit about the history of the Coast Guard’s involvement with the Loran-C navigation system. As you’ll read, the Coast Guard played a preeminent role in the devel-opment of Loran during World War II, then as the sole provider of the navigation service to the United States military during the Cold War. I recently returned from Attu Island—where they say “From Here You Can See To-morrow,” because they’re past the Interna-tional Dateline—where I stood on the steps of the Loran Station and listened to the Com-manding Officer detail the invasion by U.S. forces to recapture the island during WWII. The station reinstalls its flagpole after the win-ter season each May 11th to commemorate the landing of the invasion force under arduous conditions at Massacre Bay, which the Loran Station overlooks. Shortly after the U.S. forces cleared out the Japanese positions, the Coast Guard moved in and established a Lo-ran station, which the U.S. Army Air Corps used in the first attacks on the Japanese home-land since the “Doolittle Raid.” Once again, the U.S. Coast Guard was at the forefront of protecting the United States. On the administrative side, we’ve seen some new members join our ranks. If you’re reading

the Cutter for the first time, I challenge you to honor our history by participating in collecting it, preserving it and educating others on it. Our Editor, Rob Ayer, is always on the lookout for material to publish and share, and there are many other ways for volunteers to contribute to the Foundation and its work. The draft of our Strategic Plan has been substantially com-pleted, and it will be posted to the website shortly. Finally, I’d like to personally thank the USCG Academy Alumni Association for establishing a cadet writing contest addressing CG history topics. Jim Sylvester, a retired USCG CDR who is the President of the Association, and Ms. Tara King, the Communications Director, have been instrumental in establishing this con-test. We truly believe that this, coupled with their addition of a historical column in each edition of their magazine under the Founda-tion’s banner, will help us fulfill our mission of establishing a love of Coast Guard history at the beginning of an officer’s career. With that, I’ll report that we are on P.I.M. Make all reports to the bridge—we await fur-ther guidance and tasking from the member-ship. Regards, OPS: CDR Gary M. Thomas, USCG Executive Director, Foundation For Coast Guard History www.fcgh.org GMThomas@aol.com, (757) 375-1816

Wardroom

4

Wardroom

Update on Reissuance of The Coast Guard

Book

By Howie Thorsen, VADM USCG (ret.), Founder and Chairman Emeritus, FCGH In 2004, as chairman, I signed an agreement with Hugh Lauter Levin Associates, Inc. (HHL), and FCGH became the sponsor for the first “coffee table book” to present the story of our Service from its inception to the modern era. Our project editor was Mr. Jim Muschett, and we were very fortunate to have LCDR Tom Beard, USCG (Ret) as Editor-in-Chief, ably assisted by Mr. Jose Hanson and CWO Paul C. Scotti, USCG (Ret). The book was very successful, including a second printing, and by the middle of 2008, there were no cop-ies available…from any source other than pri-vate owners. Since FCGH received a small stipend from each sale, I had begun to lay the groundwork for a second edition, having in mind to merely have the Commandant author the section cov-ering the current Coast Guard, then quickly go to press. Admiral Allen had been the Com-mandant long enough to initiate monumental changes to the Coast Guard organization, and he readily agreed to provide an update. HHL had been acquired by Rizzo International Pub-lications, Inc., and Jim Muschett was eager to have a second edition; but the economic real-ity was that some guarantee of buying a sig-nificant number of books had to be made be-fore the publisher would commit to the pro-ject. But the task of marketing and distribution was understandably beyond the scope of FCGH. However, several of the Coast Guard Exchange System stores had been anxious to acquire more books, so I approached RDML Dan Neptune, Director of Personnel Manage-ment in HQ, and his interest and support was immediate. It took but a short time to arrange a meeting with Captain Brian Kelley and Cap-tain Ed Eng to gain their commitment to buy 3,000 books for sale in the CGES. We were fortunate to assemble the same team

that had produced the first edition. When Tom and I had some time to carefully review the original, we realized that a large portion of the book was woefully out of date. When notified of the much larger scope of work which had to be done, Jim quickly agreed, saying that to publish a second edition despite knowing that much of it was out of date would be unethical. This time, however, the same economic situa-tion allowed for only a very, very small remu-neration for the efforts. Tom and Jose essen-tially volunteered most of their time, both having invested a great deal of personal pride in the result and success of the first edition. I agreed to provide editorial assistance as well as liaison with the active Coast Guard organi-zation. With that, we had a project. The support from the Coast Guard has been simply tremendous; absent that, we would have not been success-ful. Many individuals gave of their time and cooperated with alacrity—far too many to name here. They will take pride in their con-tribution to our success when they see the book. The many hours of writing, checking, editing and commenting flowed amongst and between us for more than eight months; it was both a feeling of relief and, at the same time, a touch of sadness, that marked the final sub-mission to the publisher at the end of May. The book is scheduled to be available in late September. I have never met, nor even talked with, Jose Hanson, but have become a friend through this extended literary work and most certainly hold him in high regard for his candidness, writing skills, and above all a high degree of integrity. I have known Tom for forty years -- I was honored to be asked to write the forward to his extraordinary book Wonderful Flying

Machines: A History of U. S. Coast Guard

Helicopters, from which I now quote: “Tom is a friend. We first met and became ac-quainted in the most telling and unforgiving atmosphere—an airplane cockpit. Long before he became an accomplished writer he was a truly professional officer and aviator.”

5

For my part, I am very proud of having been a part of this undertaking. There were times when I was not certain that it would come to pass and, admittedly, a time or two when I thought I was in over my head. However, I am totally satisfied with the result and what I am certain will be an even greater success. Semper Paratus.

Howie Thorsen

the best works on CG history. The Alumni Association has agreed to provide the prizes: $275 for first place, $150 for second, $75 for third. I will arrange for a judge with suitable qualifications to assess the entries. Winning entries (edited as necessary) will be available for publication in the Cutter, the CGAAA Bulletin, and/or electronically. The course is offered during the fall and submissions will be due in January, allowing the judge to render a decision in time for both magazines to make February publication dates. But all cadets, not just certain students, are eligible; if you know any cadets currently at CGA, encourage them to participate! -- Rob Ayer

Herzberg Receives DPSA

ADM Thad Allen, Commandant of the Coast Guard, presented the following to Frederick F. Herzberg during a visit to Coast Guard Base Seattle, March 11, 2010. The citation:

From the Editor: Thank you to all those who have provided materials for another issue of the Cutter. I de-pend on you to keep me supplied; I can mas-sage almost anything into an article, but YOU need to initiate the process. For example, see the short article from Warren DeLancey in this issue; almost any reminiscence about any aspect of Coast Guard history that you’ve ex-perienced may be of interest to others. Also in this issue are more pieces condensed from cadet research papers, like those that appeared in the previous issue in February. They were written for the U.S. Maritime His-tory and Policy course that I teach at CGA. Not all cadets choose to write on CG history topics, as the scope of the course extends be-yond that; but those who are interested may do so. If you know of a topic relating to CG history that you consider underreported—or simply underappreciated—but researchable, you might want to consider forwarding that topic to me, along with any suggestions for where research materials might be found. I can suggest those subjects to the cadets when they are selecting topics for their papers, and see if any of them bite. To further encourage our young scholars’ en-thusiasm for addressing CG history topics, in cooperation with the CGA Alumni Associa-tion the FCGH is initiating a contest. For many years the CGAAA has conducted the Captain Bill Earle Creative Writing contest. There will now also be a similar contest for

Wardroom

“The Commandant of the United States Coast Guard takes great pleasure in presenting the Coast Guard Distinguished Public Service Award to Captain Frederick F. Herzberg, USCG (RET), for his outstanding service in raising the awareness of the Coast Guard’s proud history and rich maritime heritage. Af-ter successful Coast Guard and civilian ca-reers, Captain Herzberg became involved with the Coast Guard Historian’s office and be-came a staunch advocate for their mission and program goals. Using his considerable persua-sive talents and unbridled enthusiasm, Captain Herzberg near-single-handily launched “The Foundation for Coast Guard History” which marked its tenth anniversary on August 4, 2009. He utilized his own financial resources to grow this program and build it to the point where they could accept memberships and personal donations. Through his efforts, The Foundation was granted 501.c. status by the Internal Revenue Service, making contribu-tions more tax-advantaged and firmly estab-lishing The Foundation on solid footing for

6

years to come. On his own initiative, he trav-eled from his home to the far corners of the United States, gathering oral histories and videos of distinguished senior officers and many former EAGLE Commanding Officers. He helped capture the personal stories and anecdotes regarding some of the most seminal events in Coast Guard history, ensuring they would be available for future generations to learn from and treasure. Captain Herzberg served as Vice Chairman and Executive Di-rector of the Foundation for the first eight years of its existence, handling tasks which currently are performed by three Foundation volunteers. After accepting Emeritus status, he continues to be an active participant in Foundation matters. Captain Herzberg’s en-thusiastic and sustained commitment is heart-ily commended and is in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Coast Guard and public service.”

Congratulations, Fred! Well deserved. Every-thing that we do is possible only because of your pioneering efforts. -- Editor

Wardroom

Baggywinkle

Origin of “You have to go out, but…”

For many years the unofficial motto of

Coast Guard personnel was “They say

you have to go out, but you don’t have to

come back….” Policies in recent years

have attempted to modify that calculus,

but there is still a large element of truth

in it. The saying was originally attributed

to an unspecified U.S. Lifesaving Service

station keeper in the 1800s. But there was

actual, written policy that seemingly con-

firmed the concept. From the Regulations

of the U.S. Lifesaving Service of 1899,

Sec. 252, “Rescue with the boat,

breeches buoy, or life car”: “In attempt-

ing a rescue the keeper will select either

the boat, breeches buoy, or life car, as in

his judgment is best suited to effectively

cope with the existing conditions. If the

device first selected fails after such trial

as satisfies him that no further attempt

with it is feasible, he will resort to one of

the others, and if that fails, then to the

remaining one, and he will not desist

from his efforts until by actual trial the

impossibility of effecting a rescue is

demonstrated. The statement of the

keeper that he did not try to use the boat

because the sea or surf was too heavy

will not be accepted unless attempts to

launch it were actually made and failed,

or unless the conformation of the coast—

as bluffs, precipitous banks, etc.—is such

as to unquestionably preclude the use of a

boat.”

Source unknown

7

Fm Comdt Cogard Washington DC

ALCOAST 267/10

Subj: Foundation for Coast Guard History annual awards

1. The Foundation for Coast Guard History (FCGH) was formed on 4 August 1999 as a non-profit or-

ganization. Its objectives are:

A. To provide support to the Coast Guard Historian’s office,

B. To encourage studies relating to the history of our Service, and

C. To accord recognition to individuals, units, and public and private organizations for both scholarly

achievement and for raising public awareness of the challenges, accomplishments, and character of the

men and women who have contributed to the proud heritage of the Coast Guard.

2. Each year the Foundation has recognized both a large (major cutter, air station or sector) and small

(patrol boat, shore station) Coast Guard unit for contributions in preserving the history of the service.

The large unit winner receives five hundred dollars, and the small unit two hundred dollars for their mo-

rale fund. The criteria for eligibility for the unit award are:

A. Units can be active duty or reserve, auxiliary flotilla, or spouses club.

B. Units must be engaged in a specific undertaking aimed at furthering public awareness of current ac-

tivities or the history and heritage of the Coast Guard.

C. Units that receive the award may not resubmit for a period of five years.

3. The winner in the 2009 large unit category was Sector Northern New England. Among its accom-

plishments, it implemented an aggressive sector history and heritage preservation program, inventoried

artifacts at units and displayed them for public viewing, collected oral histories, and collaborated with

the city of Rockland, Maine, on celebrating it becoming a Coast Guard city.

4. In the 2009 small unit category, the winner was International Ice Patrol. The International Ice Patrol

saved artifacts from scheduled disposal, including several hundred glass lantern slides with imagery of

USRC Bear, USRC Thetis, and USRC Itasca. They also provided critical assistance to the Coast Guard

quest to locate wreckage of J2F-4 aircraft lost in Greenland during a rescue attempt in 1942, continued

digitizing annual reports dating to 1913 and preserved thousands of negatives found in storage.

5. Units and organizations are encouraged to submit a concise written description, in triplicate, of their

efforts. These may be a single specific completed project or an ongoing, continuing undertaking. Photo-

graphs and printed material related to the project are useful but not necessary. Such material will not be

returned.

6. Units and organizations are also encouraged to submit individuals who have contributed to the fur-

thering of Coast Guard history. Documentation should be in the form of a letter, in triplicate, detailing

the contributions of the individual.

7. Deadline for entries is 18 June 2010.

8. Mail entries to: Coast Guard Unit Award Committee, Foundation for Coast Guard History, c/o John

Galluzzo, P.O. Box 213, Hull, MA, 02045.

9. Additional information may be obtained at the FCGH website at www.fcgh.org.

10. Released by RDML Karl L. Schultz, Director of Governmental and Public affairs.

11. Internet release authorized.

The Wardroom/Message Board:

8

The First Revenue Cutter Service Officers

By Cadet 1/c Francis Cheske

Introduction When the Revenue Cutter Service (RCS) was established on August 4, 1790, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton prescribed a ten-cutter fleet to extend along the eastern coast of the Atlantic. President George Wash-ington took an active role in selecting the ten captains to command those vessels and wished to appoint them exclusively. Washing-ton appointed the first ten captains of the RCS according to their character, experience, and political patronage. Foreground One way of identifying what was “right” about the first skippers is to look at problems that developed with those who followed them. This generational shift occurred during the Spencer-Fraser period of the mid-nineteenth century. John C. Spencer, the 16th Secretary of the Treasury, and Captain Alexander V. Fra-ser, the first military Commandant of the RCS, focused on restructuring the organiza-tion, including its officer selection process. The degree of change that the Spencer-Fraser regime brought to the service indicated the problems that had developed in the organiza-tion. Their evaluation of both the preceding and succeeding eras in the form of candid feedback highlights the key problems of their time, which not only illuminates what had gone wrong later, but also what had gone right in the selection of the first officers. Inapt and disruptive officers posed a problem in need of change. The changes Spencer and Fraser made were intended to attrit unsuitable RCS officers and create a meritocratic accession process, thus doing away with a flawed bureaucracy. Even earlier inklings of the changes needed in the RCS had been recognized by Louis McLane, Secretary of the Treasury in 1832. He issued a new policy concerning the cross-over of Naval officers into the Revenue Ma-

rine: “[T]the two corps were to be untangled and kept separate in the future. Accordingly, commissions held in the Revenue-Marine by naval officers were revoked on April 30, 1832.” By 1832 McLane and others had rec-ognized the incompatibility of Naval officers serving as Revenue-Marine officers. It was the mindset of a Navy officer to be predominantly concerned with issues of war, whereas the focus of the Revenue Cutter officer was safety and law. Former Navy officers stubbornly refused to abide by RCS regulations. In some instances, Naval captains ordered to revenue cutters greatly disliked their assignments and continued to wear their Navy uniforms as a symbol of protest. Their attitudes were re-flected in their performance. This hampered the mission success of the RCS. This difficulty is particularly interesting given that in one of Hamilton’s early addresses to Congress, he had suggested that the RCS cut-ters be captained by commissioned officers of the Navy, in the belief that “[t]his will not only induce fit men the more readily to en-gage, but will attach them to their duty with a nicer sense of honor.” What Hamilton sought among the first officers was an ethic of ser-vice as well as technical proficiency. Yet in the same report to Congress, as in a circular sent to the first captains, Hamilton declared that the commanding officers were to be deemed “Officers of Customs.” Thus, his ob-jective was to create customs billets aboard RCS vessels, but fill them with former cap-tains from the Continental Navy. Hamilton’s aim was to appoint men who had proven their character and experience through some meas-ure of maritime service to the United States, preferably in the Continental Navy. This ap-proach proved advantageous—until the found-ing of the Department of the Navy, which of-fered Naval captains the potential to return to their Service. By 1832, Secretary McLane was finding the fit between Naval officers and RCS service to no longer be conducive to efficiency. Thus he ordered that “in the cutter service in future,

Main Prop

9

vacancies will be filled by promotion from among the officers in that service, when that shall be found preferable to other appoint-ments, having regards to fitness as well as seniority.” And by 1843 Spencer and Fraser established a system to ensure that all future appointments were to be made to the office of third lieutenant, and that any officer seeking further promotion was to be examined by a board of officers to assess his suitability. The latter was the biggest change to the RCS dur-ing the Spencer-Fraser regime. One compo-nent of the Act of March 3, 1845, stipulated that “No person…be appointed to the officer of Captain, first, second, and third lieutenants of any revenue cutter, who does not adduce competent proof of proficiency and skill in seamanship and navigation.” This was important because the appointment system still had no means of screening for technical proficiency. Instead, political ap-pointments resulted in a flawed means of ac-cession and a poor caliber of officers. This had contributed to McLane’s problems with prior naval officers, as many of their commis-sions had come via political endorsement as well. Before the reforms of the 1840s, re-quests for appointments and promotions were consistently accompanied with recommenda-tions from powerful businessmen and impor-tant congressmen; the length of time a captain held command of a cutter became a matter of “political luck.” Perhaps the earliest and most barefaced ex-ploitation of this bureaucratic system occurred when President John Adams appointed Cap-tain Jonathan Chapman to command the Pickering. By 1798, Captain John Foster Wil-liams, one of the Service’s first captains, had proven to be a most noteworthy commanding officer and was expected to be placed in com-mand of a new cutter, the Pickering. How-ever, Williams did not receive orders to the Pickering—as a result of President Adams acting on advice from Secretary of State Timothy Pickering’s nephew, T. Williams. Williams advised Adams that “J.F.W. was

old…without enterprise,” and that there was no man “more eligible” than Chapman. Thus, the abuse of political endorsement be-gan early; but even the earliest appointments as commanding officer required some form of political patronage. An Officer Corps for the Service Washington and Hamilton sought experienced men of character who were endorsed by then-credible businessmen and politicians. Why did Hamilton consider that the needs of the Ser-vice required an officer corps, as opposed to civilian leadership? In order to answer this, defining the mission of the RCS is required. What did Hamilton want in the final product; what did success look like for his Revenue Cutter Service? Claims that the RCS acted somewhat as a ru-dimentary measure of national security are supported in Hamilton’s papers; however, the primary role of the RCS was law enforcement: the collection of revenue from foreign and domestic vessels transporting goods to Amer-ica. Therefore its officers would be considered law enforcement officials. Hamilton under-stood what would be required of the cutters performing this function and was better able to screen for command of them. Hamilton recognized the significance the cap-tains of these cutters would play in achieving the success desired for the Service. One argu-ment as to why Hamilton sought out a profes-sional officer corps is that he wished to miti-gate future problems of corruption, as he fore-saw the expansion of the service. Another is that not only would the holder of the position need to be technically proficient, but also would need outstanding character to uphold the duties of the office; such character would prove vital to the execution of the mission. In an address to Congress, Hamilton discussed the captaining of the cutters: “The Utility of an establishment of this nature must depend on the exertion, vigilance and fidelity of those, to whom the charge of the boats shall be con-

Main Prop

10

fided. If these are not respectable characters, they rather serve to screen, than detect fraud.” A likely reason why Hamilton suggested offi-cers of the Navy is the image of the officer in early American society. In the context of post-Revolutionary America, the image of the maritime population yielded sentiments of abhorrence and a desire for separation from a character commonly referred to as ‘Jack Tar.’ This vagabond personality was a ragged, foul-mouthed, irresponsible merchant mariner in need of a bath. Part of the societal stigma at-tached to Jack Tar derived from society’s un-familiarity with his profession. Therefore, in most instances people associated any maritime professional with the image of Jack Tar. Hamilton was aware of this social cleavage, and perhaps that is why he proposed a military organizational structure, so as to associate instead professionalism and nobility with the new service. To create this image, Hamilton recognized the Service would need “some proper officer.” This individual would have to understand the concept of officer presence as well as the utility of the uniform to enhancing that presence, and that his actions would be closely observed by his crew, his own country and foreign countries alike. Not only would the officer be required to exhibit professional competence, but that character of the highest caliber that is integral to assuring self-accountability. The belief was that if the offi-cer was able to account for his own actions, he would be more than capable of accounting for the actions of others. To achieve this image, Hamilton required spe-cific characteristics of the men being consid-ered for command of the first ten cutters. Rather than selecting the individual and plac-ing him in command of a vessel, as had been the case in the Continental Navy, Hamilton inverted that process. He defined what master-ing a cutter necessitated, then selected com-manding officers who would fulfill that ex-pectation. In his letter of instruction, Hamilton advised the captains on their temperament: “[I]t has been judged most advisable to listen

to the suggestions of caution rather than of confidence…” He warned them to attend to their own moral disposition—a main reason for their initial appointment—because he also wanted the captains to make sure their crews were vigilant keepers of their conduct. With regard to the actual wearing of the uni-form: Quintin Colville discussed the different personal characteristics associated with it for British Naval personnel in the 1930s. That is to say, when wearing the uniform, observers are predisposed to view the wearer in a par-ticular light. The symbology associated with the uniform was one of “duty, self-control, discipline, conformity and leadership ability, in combination with a specific set of social skills (including a knowledge of dress) loosely labeled 'good manners'.” Colville continues by citing Grant McCracken:

[T]he wearer exercised spe-cial powers of self-control, that his emotional and intel-lectual life had special quali-ties of rigor and discipline, that this was a man who was fully in control of his faculties and fully in possession of himself…[with the implica-tion that] here is a man who is entitled to dominion over oth-ers.

What Colville and McCracken present is that the reputation of the uniform preceded the individual wearer. Hamilton understood this, as the uniform rep-resented a distinction in the societal class structure in early America. What Hamilton sought to do was to fit the man to the uniform, not the other way around. This was a revolu-tionary idea that was exclusive to the RCS. The Process: the Selection Criteria at Work In an early address to Congress, Hamilton spoke of character and experience as require-

Main Prop

11

ments for appointment to this office. Hamilton began writing to various Collectors of Cus-toms soliciting recommendations to command the ships. Once the word leaked to the public, endorsements from the business and civilian sectors began to flow in, adding the third cri-terion to the selection process but clouding it as well. Both Washington and Hamilton re-ceived letters and petitions from candidates themselves as well as congressmen and other notables. It is important to note that through-out the selection process Washington and Hamilton maintained a close correspondence with each other and were able to agree on what they were looking for. Even as ink was spent discussing candidates, they were able to work from a shared standard instead of argu-ing over differences of opinion.

Character

Character afforded Hamilton the most diffi-culty, as any quality defined so vaguely is quite subjective. Most references to character came in the form of a petition or recommen-dation. Many came from politicians and the “brown-nosing” of potential candidates them-selves. This makes the distinction between character and political patronage difficult to define, as these endorsements were mostly advanced on the basis of character. Since the majority of character references came from prominent figures, and “since they were ha-bitually written in superlatives…[they] were of questionable value.” In such a situation, Washington and Hamilton had to make their own distinctions regarding character. The focus became not who attested to someone’s character but rather what was actually said about the qualities of the different candidates. In some instances Hamilton’s legwork was not necessary, as Washington had already de-termined who he wanted to captain specific vessels. However, most of Washington’s se-lectees turned down the position—most often because the pay was only thirty dollars a month. The U.S. Revenue Cutter Virginia was an example. Hamilton did not have to find a

captain for the Virginia cutter, as Washington (a Virginian himself) had predetermined him-self that Captain Richard Taylor was a “proper person both as to character, and experience in the profession.” Another illustration of an un-affected judgment of character was Hamil-ton’s own evaluation of Jonathan Maltbie, who became captain of the U.S. Revenue Cut-ter Argus. According to King, correspondence between Washington and Hamilton indicates that Hamilton found Maltbie to be a “man of fair character and an experienced and good seaman, who might be expected to execute his duty faithfully as the Commander of a revenue Cutter.” Though Washington and Hamilton had little personal interaction with many of the candi-dates, through the evaluation of both the sub-stance of endorsements and the originators thereof they were confident that they had ap-pointed the most suitable men to command the new fleet. In the circular sent to the first com-manding officers, Hamilton reminded them they had “been selected with so careful an attention to character as to afford the strongest assurance that their conduct will be that of good Officers and good Citizens.” Experience

Besides character, another element that weighed heavily was service, as it contributed to the experience necessary to captain a cutter in the RCS. Washington and Hamilton be-lieved that a record of service to the U.S. was an indication of future behavior. Hamilton suggested to Congress the appointment of for-mer officers of the Navy, not only to assure the previously discussed trait of officership but also experience in service to the country. Not only would this ensure knowledgeable military officers, but would also help weed out those of possibly traitorous inclinations. The fear of turncoats was so strong that in the case of Captain Robert Cochran, who was from South Carolina—where “old law” was still favored—Washington insisted that he sign a double oath of allegiance before taking

Main Prop

12

command of the U.S. Revenue Cutter South

Carolina. Washington’s dual pledge was separate from the standard oath that all offi-cers were required to take. Washington ad-ministered to them an oath, “not only as Offi-cers of the Customs but also to support the Constitution of the United States.” Clearly loyalty to the U.S. was a large component in appointing the first captains; in most cases the candidates’ service record spoke volumes con-cerning their faithfulness. The worth of experience was not limited to maritime service in the Revolution; a valued asset was employment in the state and local revenue services, as was the case for Captains James Montgomery and Richard Taylor. Un-derstanding that gaining a position in a sub-federal revenue service would provide “experience in the profession,” Montgomery went to work for the Philadelphia revenue service and Taylor for the Virginia revenue service. What all of these men had in common is that they had fought for the U.S. in the American Revolution, with nine of the ten serving in a maritime capacity. The exception was Captain Robert Cochran, who served as a major and lieutenant colonel in New York regiments. The others served as officers aboard Conti-nental or state navy ships; commanded priva-teers against the British; commanded cutters that attacked enemy vessels and transported goods; supplied ships; or helped to secure river access. They knew their local waters in-side and out, and also had information on the illicit trading business, including patterns of smuggling in the area. These men clearly had proven their worth, not only in service to the United States, but as qualified ship handlers and military officers. Patronage

The final criterion which Washington and Hamilton used to select the first captains of the RCS was political patronage. Another commonality among the first commanding

officers besides experience was that “their integrity and good character were attested to by prominent collectors of the customs, by former Revolutionary War officers, and by businessmen and politicians.” As Washington was the final signatory on each of the ten commissions, there were a number of “push, pull” factors acting on his judgment. Because Congress controlled the funding of the RCS, appointments to captain would need to meet the approval of a Congressional majority. The relationship between Washington and the Congress was one of cohesion: Washington worked closely with the Congress, and the Congress made conscious efforts to find the middle ground on many of the issues facing the new government. The members of Con-gress pledged that “they will maintain and assist him and adhere to him…with their lives and fortunes.” Washington likewise saw Con-gress as the originator of “virtuous policy” that was a source of happiness within society. With Washington being the moral symbol of the United States and Congress the legislative body of freedom, the two worked in unison to appoint the most qualified individuals to com-mand the revenue cutters. That being said, Congress controlled the funds allotted to the Service, and many of the Sena-tors were former generals who had served with Washington during the Revolution. Washington understood the importance of keeping Congress content by appointing enough of the candidates endorsed by its members. Perhaps the most telling thing to note is that none of the first commanding offi-cers of the RCS was appointed without a po-litical voucher. Reviewing a few of the recommendations at-tached to these men illustrates the importance of political patronage. It is important to re-member that for some of these men their own resumés spoke volumes more than the fact that a Senator vouched for them; but others who shared similar service records were com-pared based on who had said what about them. There were some men about whom Washing-

Main Prop

13

ton could think of no one better to captain a cutter. Beyond those he was not so firm on controlling appointments as to ignore the counsel of Hamilton. He kept a close corre-spondence with the Secretary discussing the various opinions and qualifications. Captain Simon Gross came highly recom-mended by Joshua Barney, a naval war hero of the Revolution and a close friend of Wash-ington’s. Barney was actually the first choice for command of Active, but he deferred the appointment to Gross, speaking on his behalf. Another example is Captain John Howell, who Georgia Senator James Gunn said “has a perfect knowledge of our coast which he ac-quired in our service…his application is aided by his Excellency the Governor…and it is in his power to produce the best credentials of his being a man of unblemished character.” Jonathan Maltbie’s application was supported by Connecticut merchant Thaddeus Burr and Colonel David Humphreys, the latter of whom had been one of Washington’s aides-de-camp during the War. Burr said that “Mr. Maltbie who is an honest discreet man…will not dis-appoint the expectation of Government…” In those same remarks, Burr referred Hamilton to two Senators, Colonel Wadsworth and Mr. Sturgis. The last two officers, whose records stand alone as perhaps the most distinguished of the first captains of the RCS, Captains John Fos-ter Williams and Hopley Yeaton, also serve as illustrations of political influence. Captain Williams was highly recommended by the powerful Benjamin Lincoln, former Secretary of War and Collector of Customs for Massachusetts. Lincoln offered Hamilton his “warm” recommendation for Williams and stated that Williams was “entitled to prefer-ence.” Washington held Lincoln in high es-teem; he had asked him to accept the sword of Cornwallis at the surrender at Yorktown. The trust and friendship between the two made Washington’s decision that much easier. Captain Hopley Yeaton was the first commis

sioned officer of the RCS; though speculation exists as to why he was first, a strong case can be built around his record of service. Never-theless, he too received a measure of political support to attach to his application. The strongest proponent of Yeaton would appear to have been Joseph Whipple, who had served in the American Revolution as a captain in the Continental Navy. He called Yeaton “in my opinion the best qualified of any persons in this quarter” and said that “I must impute my confidence in Captain Yeaton and his zeal for the good of the service rather than his extrava-gancy….” The extensive letter trail between Washington, Hamilton and the various political players supports the conclusion that political patron-age did play a role in the commissioning of the first captains of the RCS. Conclusion Finding out how the collaboration between Washington and Hamilton yielded the first RCS officers has required a projection for-ward into a period nearly fifty years after the creation of the Service. The changes made in the mid-nineteenth century provided a key insight into what Washington and Hamilton wanted, not only in the officers but the organi-zation. During the Spencer-Fraser period two significant problems with officers brought about change: poor qualifications and poor performance. Knowledge of this, combined with research in the Washington and Hamilton papers, provides sufficient evidence that the first men to be commissioned officers of the RCS were appointed because they possessed the necessary character traits to hold the of-fice, the experience needed to be technically proficient, and enough political support from the right people to be ensure they were the most fit and proper gentlemen to command. Sources

Clark, William Bell. George Washington’s

�avy. Louisiana: Louisiana State Univer-sity Press, 1960.

Colville, Quintin. “Jack Tar and the

Main Prop

14

Gentleman Officer: The Role of Uniform in Shaping the Class- and Gender-Related Identities of British Naval Personnel, 1930-1939.” Transactions of the Royal

Historical Society. Royal Historical Soci-ety, 2003.

Evans, Stephan H. The United States Coast

Guard 1790-1915: A Definitive History. Maryland: The United States Naval In-stitute, 1949.

Hamilton, Alexander. “Alexander Hamilton’s Letter of Instruction to the Commanding Officers of the Revenue Cutters.” Treasury Department, 1791.

Heydenreich, James G. “Hopley Yeaton and the Revenue Marine Service.” U.S. Coast

Guard Academy Bulletin. Sep, Oct 1967-Nov, Dec 1968.

Kern, Florence, ed. James Montgomery’s

Revenue Cutter General Green. Washing-ton: Allied Enterprises, 1977.

-----. John Foster Williams’ Revenue Cutter

Massachusetts. Washington: Allied Enter-prises, 1976.

-----. Jonathan Maltbie’s Revenue Cutter Ar-

gus. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1976.

-----. John Howell’s Revenue Cutter Eagle. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1978.

-----. Patrick Dennis’ Revenue Cutter Vigilant. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1976.

-----. Richard Taylor’s Revenue Cutter Vir-

ginia. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1977.

-----. Robert Cochran’s Revenue Cutter South

Carolina. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1978.

-----. Simon Gross’s Revenue Cutter Active. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1977.

-----. William Cooke’s Revenue Cutter Dili-

gence. Washington: Allied Enterprises, 1979.

King, Irving H. George Washington’s Coast

Guard. Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1978.

Lemisch, Jesse. “Jack Tar in the Streets: Mer-chant Seamen in the Politics of Revolu-tionary America.” William and Mary

Quarterly, Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, July 1968.

Schwartz, Barry. “Washington and the Whig Conception of Heroic Leadership.” American Sociological Review. Ameri-can Sociological Association, 1983.

Main Prop

Sandy Hook and the Development of the

Life Saving Service and Today’s Coast

Guard

By Cadet 1/c Hayla Dubolsky Sandy Hook is a seven-mile stretch of sand jutting out of central New Jersey. It is famous throughout the state for its shoreline, fre-quented by locals and visitors alike. In the summers, the parking lots are filled by noon. People travel in from across the bay and from neighboring states to fish, sunbathe, use the bike trail, and enjoy the ocean. But there is another side to Sandy Hook. The trail frequented by joggers and bicyclers was once a railroad used to move supplies. The beachgoers splash around carelessly in an ocean which has been the site of countless shipwrecks. Beach lifeguards tread over the same sand that the watchmen of the Life Sav-ing Service patrolled over 150 years ago. Though times have changed, the need to pre-serve lives remains. Sandy Hook was a natural location for some of the first great develop-ments in policies and technologies of the Life Saving Service, and to this day provides sup-port to the United States Coast Guard. Location

The importance of Sandy Hook is directly correlated to its location. The hook-shaped beach points out “northward from the New Jersey coast into the outer harbor of New York City.” New York City quickly became one of early America’s richest and busiest centers of commerce. The sandy stretch of beach’s “importance derives from the fact that the only natural deepwater channel into the

15

harbor runs very close to the tip of Sandy Hook.” Before dredging technologies im-proved, many larger ships were forced to steer close to the hook to access New York Harbor. In the early 19th century it was an area of ex-tremely high maritime traffic. Dangerous Shoals

The seas close to the shore of Sandy Hook were not merely busy – they were dangerous. The 1916 Coast Pilot warns: “[s]hoals extend for a considerable distance off many of the inlets; all of the inlets are obstructed by shift-ing bars and require local knowledge to carry the best water.” Wind and currents have a sub-stantial effect on the hook. Most notably, the northward-flowing littoral current moves sand from the southern part of the hook northward, creating an ever-changing environment for the mariner to navigate. Whether due to inatten-tion, foolishness, or some other accident, many shiphandlers found themselves rendered helpless, beached off the shoals of Sandy Hook. Roughly ninety such wrecks occurred every year between 1818 and 1848, many along New Jersey shores. It was reported in 1848 that 158 sailing vessels had been “lost off the New Jersey coast” since 1839. These accidents cost the United States lives and money. Several resulted in the deaths of over a hundred people. Something had to be done to safeguard the lives and property of those transiting New York Harbor.

Birth of the Life Saving Service

In 1848, Congressman William A. Newell of Allentown, New Jersey, made such a request. Newell was elected in 1847, representing Monmouth County, New Jersey, which Sandy Hook remains part of today. Newell, a trained physician, was moved when he “witnessed the wreck of the Austrian brig Terasto in 1839.” He watched as the crew of the brig, wrecked off Long Beach Island, located south of Sandy Hook on the New Jersey shore, struggled to “swim 300 yards to the shore in rough wa-ters.” He stood helplessly on the beach as thir-

teen men perished in front of him. It is likely that this event served as his motivation to make provisions to safeguard life at sea in the future. Congress agreed to Newell’s request for “$10,000 to build eight ‘lifeboat stations’ equipped with ‘surfboats, lifeboats, and other means for the preservation of life and property shipwrecked on the coast of New Jersey be-tween Sandy Hook and Little Egg Harbor.’” These first stations, completed by 1849, were situated ten miles apart from each other along the New Jersey coast, with the northernmost station being built on Sandy Hook in an area called Spermaceti Cove. The station was about halfway down the hook, facing the At-lantic Ocean. Newell’s bill, dated 14 August 1848, created the United States Life Saving Service, though it would not officially hold that title until 1878.

Stations on the Hook

The original Spermaceti Cove Station Life Saving Station was the first of the eight to be built. In 1894, a new Spermaceti Cove Station was erected roughly 1,000 feet away from the original built in 1848. The location of the sta-tion was shifted in 1894 to provide better fa-cilities for the crew and more space to stow the necessary life saving equipment. In addi-tion, the original structure stood within range of the Sandy Hook Proving Grounds—an ar-tillery range. A second station had been built on the northern tip of Sandy Hook, but was removed after World War II. The structure at Spermaceti Cove, established in 1894, remains today in good condition. The station is currently about 150 feet from the shore, much closer than the 800 feet it was originally positioned inland.

Spermaceti Cove Station

The new Spermaceti Cove Station was one of at least twenty-eight new Duluth-type stations built in 1894 when the Life Saving Service

Main Prop

16

expanded. The first six of these stations were built along the coast of New Jersey; others were added along Long Island and even up to Rhode Island. By 1854, fifty-five stations had been built stretching along the Atlantic Coast, the Gulf Coast, and also the Great Lakes. The Duluth-type station was designed by George R. Tolman and built to specification for the Life Saving Service. The original design was simple and functional. It featured three sepa-rate, but connected, sections: “a one-and-a-half story Main Block; a one-story Boat Room; and a four-story Watch Tower.” Upon its completion in 1894, a person viewing the Spermaceti Cove Duluth structure from its front, with one’s back toward the Atlantic, would have seen what appeared to be a small house with a front porch, attached to a four-story, shingled tower, attached to a small ga-rage with two large doors and a slight ramp. The building looks much the same today. The main difference is that in 1962 the porch was enclosed. The structure itself may appear quaint, but the people and technology the sta-tions housed were anything but simple. Life Saving Technology

Many wrecks were of wooden sailing vessels which would beach on shoals and get smashed by waves. They were usually only hundreds of yards off shore. The simplest method to re-trieve the stranded victims was by small boat. The Life Saving Service had three different types of wooden surfboats: the Beebe, the Higgins and Gifford, and the Beebe-McLellan. The 25- to 27-foot-long boats were constructed of white cedar and white oak. Each crew, manning six oars, could rescue and carry an additional fifteen people at a time. Surfboats were highly successful in res-cuing people from wrecked vessels. However, on some occasions the seas were too heavy to safely launch the boats. So the Life Saving Service also had line-throwing projectiles available. There were two types of gun, the Lyle and the Hunt, along with the Cunningham line-throwing rocket. Guns were

preferred because of their ease of use, lower cost, and higher accuracy; however, the Cun-ningham rocket had the largest range of the three methods: 700 to 1,000 yards. The Lyle gun was preferred to the Hunt gun because it could fire a heavier line. Furthermore, the Hunt gun needed to have its projectile sent back to the factory every time it was used, which drove up costs, whereas the Lyle gun’s projectile could be used multiple times. The Lyle gun was the clear favorite among the Life Saving Service Station crews. The purpose of the line-throwing gun (Lyle or Hunt) or rocket was to get the line over to the wrecked vessel. The crew of the vessel would secure the line to the highest point, generally a mast. The wreck’s crew would then thread the line back and the station crew would pull through a hawser line. On land, the other end of the line would be secured onto a tall wooden frame. From this line, the station crew would most likely send over one of two more life saving inventions: the breeches buoy or the Francis lifecar. The breeches buoy was a simple yet highly effective invention. It consisted of a pair of pants sewn onto a floating ring. The victim would get into the pants and be pulled across the line to safety. On 17 December 1907, the Edmund J. Phinney wrecked 300 yards off of North Beach on Sandy Hook. Both Sandy Hook Station crews met and worked together to pull five of the Phinney’s crew to shore using the breeches buoy. By the time all were safe ashore except the vessel’s captain and first mate, the ship appeared to be succumbing to the wind and seas. Both men squeezed into the breeches buoy for the last trip back and were pulled onto the shore just as their vessel fell apart. Thus, all seven were saved by the teamwork of the station crews and the breeches buoy. The Francis lifecar would often be sent over by the line and then pulled back to save the victims, similar to the manner in which the breeches buoy was utilized. Joseph Francis of

Main Prop

17

Toms River, New Jersey, worked in New York for an ironworks company. He invented the lifecar in the 1840s. [See Regent Doug Kroll’s book review in newsletter #27, the Summer 2009 issue of the Cutter, of George Buker’s history of the invention of the lifecar. – Ed.] Francis’ creation was highly effective and, in some cases, the only hope for a rescue. Another advantage to this method was that it required little training to pull the car from ship to shore and back; though it took some strength, it was relatively simple to operate. Nevertheless, the crews of stations did train. Training, Regulations, and Inspections

Today, it is rare for any Coastguardsman to go through a workday without some type of train-ing or an inspection. In addition, nearly every-thing he or she does is explained in a regula-tion. These three things help the service to perform at peak efficiency. When lives are on the line, there can be no other way. In Febru-ary 1871, when Sumner Increase Kimball was appointed the head of both the Life Saving Service and the Revenue Cutter Service, he took ownership of the responsibility. In less than twenty years, “Kimball had made the service the model of its kind in the world.” When Kimball began, stations were rundown, equipment was broken or missing, and some crewmembers were incompetent or otherwise unfit to perform rescues. In true Coast Guard fashion, Kimball was not satisfied with the status quo; he set out to correct the deficien-cies immediately. In addition, he worked to make sure there was a station every three miles, implemented a beach patrol, and set up a system of communication between nearby stations. Kimball also devised and established a training schedule for a typical week. With the additional possibility of a rescue, the life of a Life Saving Station crewman was busy. Life Saving Stations had even more similari-ties to modern Coast Guard platforms. Each station had its own commanding officer, called a “keeper.” Like a commanding officer,

the keeper was responsible for all of the sta-tion’s equipment and operation of the appara-tuses. He also kept a log and sent out weekly reports of rescues the station had participated in. The crewmen also stood four-hour watches, which remain the standard today. Watches were stood in pairs; at the beginning of each watch, the crewmen would walk the beach in opposite directions searching for wrecks. The watchstander would rendezvous with the watchstander from the neighboring station and exchange station checks to prove he had conducted his patrol. Logs were kept and every passing vessel was noted. Also similar to modern Coastguardsmen, the station crew conducted drills. They would practice a particular part of a rescue over and over again so each crewmember understood his duties and the team could complete the task adeptly when real rescues occurred. Pre-vention was important as well, just as it is in today’s Coast Guard. Along with rescuing the passengers of wrecked vessels, the Life Sav-ing Service acted proactively. Knowing what to expect, they could signal danger if vessels passed too close to shoals or call in tugs for vessels before they found themselves in harm’s way. Success of the Service

The Life Saving Service lacked some of the tradition and formality that the Coast Guard practices today, but the numbers prove the success of the organization. Life as a station crewmember was physically and mentally taxing. Injuries and illness often forced mem-bers into early retirement. Yet even with the difficulties they faced, morale was high among crews. The service flourished under Kimball’s leadership. In all, the crews of the Life Saving Service “saved 181,449 lives and 28,000 vessels, thus making it one of the greatest humanitarian services ever operated by the U.S. government.” In 1915, the Life Saving Service joined with the Revenue Cutter Service to form the United

Main Prop

18

States Coast Guard. The humanitarian focus remains. Their motto echoes through our Coast Guard today: “The regulations say you have to go out, they don’t say you have to come back.” Both then and now, the service has been based on clear-cut rules and regula-tions and selfless acts of courage. Further-more, one would be hard pressed to find an organization with members more devoted to the cause. Sandy Hook Today

The age of sail has long since passed. As stronger, faster, more maneuverable iron-hulled steamships replaced sailing vessels, shipwrecks became rare occurrences. Vessels no longer need to pass Sandy Hook to transit in and out of New York Harbor. Technologies such as GPS and radar, as well as improved navigational aids, have made transit by sea far less treacherous. In time, the benefit of having eyes from the shore on the sea was lost. Today, the Spermaceti Cove Life Saving Sta-tion, built in 1894, serves as a visitor’s center. Park guests frequent the historically accurate structure to learn more about the history of the service as well as Sandy Hook itself. Few visi-tors realize that the building they visit once housed the heroes who stood up against harsh cold, angry seas, and all odds to give hope to those who could find hope nowhere else. However, the benefit of having an adept crew ready to respond to anything endures. A Coast Guard station remains on the hook today. The current station resides at the northern tip of Sandy Hook. Assets located at the modern station include 47- and 25-foot motor vessels. Like crewmen of the Life Saving Service sta-tions, the members of the Coast Guard station continue to stand the watch. The modern sta-tion workday begins at 0730 and concludes at 1730. Just as past station crews did, the Sandy Hook station crew performs rescues at sea; however, their mission has expanded to in-clude law enforcement of fisheries and recrea-tional boating and homeland security. The

station still serves to protect both domestic and international mariners. Connections

Both the Life Saving Service and the Coast Guard stationed on Sandy Hook served to sat-isfy the need of maritime safety and security. The hook’s proximity to New York Harbor gave it importance that other areas did not have. The high traffic paired with dangerous shoals necessitated the presence of the first life saving stations. With the efforts of Con-gressman Newell, these stations became the U.S. Life Saving Service. The service thrived under the leadership of Sumner Kimball, and then became what is known today as the U.S. Coast Guard. Newell’s first eight manned sta-tions spread from the Jersey Shore, to the At-lantic, to the Gulf Coast, and to the Great Lakes. Today, the U.S. Coast Guard has an interna-tional presence. Sandy Hook, New Jersey, has been the epicenter of the Life Saving Ser-vice’s development and continues to support the U.S. Coast Guard through the presence of a modern station as well as through providing the public with information of the service’s heroic history. Sources Gabrielan, Randall. Sandy Hook. Charleston,

S.C.: Arcadia Publishing, 1999. Hoffman, Thomas J. Sandy Hook's Lifesavers.

National Park Service, n.d. Jones, E. L. United States Coast Pilot Atlantic

Coast. Washington: Government Printing Office, 1916.

King, Irving H. The Coast Guard Expands. Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1996.

Lee III, James J. Spermaceti Cove Life-Saving

Station: Historic Structure Report. Lowell, MA: National Park Service and Historical Architecture Program, 2008.

Kroll, Naomi D., and Sharon K. Ofenstein.

Main Prop

19

Building 25 Enlisted Men's Barracks:

Historic Structure Report. Lowell, MA: National Park Service Building Con-servation Branch, 2002.

Sandy Hook. http://www.sandy-hook.com/ (1 December 2009).

The Sandy Hook Foundation. Sandy Hook Nature. http://sandyhookfoundationnj.org/visit/nature. htm (1 December 2009).

Torres-Reyes, Ricardo. �ational Register of

Historic Places Inventory-�omination

Form: Spermaceti Cove �o. 2 Life-

Saving Service Station. Boston, Mass.: United States Department of the Interior, 1981.

Unit Information: Station Sandy Hook. Cape May, NJ: United States Coast Guard, 2009.

United States Coast Guard. http://www . u s c g .m i l / h i s t o r y / s t a t i o n s /SANDYHOOK.pdf (1 December 2009).

fense needs all along the Atlantic seaboard.

How did Salem’s air station begin?

By 21st-century standards, the 1930s were

technologically simple. There were no per-

sonal computers, GPS satellite navigation sys-

tems, cell phones or Internet. Push-button

telephones had not been invented. Yet people

then were distinctly modern and embraced

technological progress. Aviation was then just

coming into its own.

When we review old Salem newspapers on

microfilm, we gain some insights into those

days. During the first month of 1935, Salem

was clobbered with a bad blizzard, the “worst

storm in 40 years.” Nearly 18 inches of snow

dropped in a single storm.

Then, as February arrived, the Coast Guard

started taking actions to establish its new base

on Winter Island by downgrading and relocat-

ing the sea-air rescue station from Ten Pound

Island in Gloucester Harbor on Cape Ann.

Just as Roger Conant and other early English-

men relocated their Cape Ann Colony to

Naumkeag in 1626, so the Coast Guard in

1935 also moved its regional base of opera-

tions from Gloucester to Salem.

The Salem Coast Guard Air Station’s chief

responsibility during most of its years was

responding to the distress calls of local mari-

ners. Fishermen, recreational boaters and oth-

ers who ran into a variety of troubles at sea

(sinking boats, fierce storms, engine troubles,

medical maladies, etc.) called the U.S. Coast

Guard for help.

Help was often dispatched using large, am-

phibious, twin-engine seaplanes, which lo-

cated mariners in distress visually and by

Main Prop

The 75th Anniversary of Salem's Coast

Guard Air Station

By John Goff

Preservation Perspective, GateHouse Media

Salem, MA, February 4, 2010

This February marks a most significant

month, as 75 years ago, in 1935, the U.S.

Coast Guard Air Station opened on Winter

Island in Salem.

Probably best known now for its sandy

beaches, historic lighthouse, ancient Fort

Pickering, campground and public boat ramp,

Winter Island for years also had something

else: a sea-air rescue station. Officers in crisp

uniforms, sleek silver amphibious airplanes, a

seaplane hangar, a barracks building and a

range of other Coast Guard assets made it all

work. The place was tied to maritime and de-

20

homing in on radio signals. The Coast Guard

planes often operated in miserable weather

conditions. Yet the waters north of Boston and

in Salem Harbor were used as runways. High

speed “crash” boats were routinely sent speed-

ing along the water runways in advance of

takeoffs and landings to make sure no logs,

buoys or floating debris would sabotage any

rescue missions.

In February 1935, as the transfer of operations

from Gloucester to Salem was first made, the

Coast Guard shipped from Gloucester a 36-

foot speed boat, another boat used for freight

service, and two seaplanes to make the neces-

sary rescues. Four other planes were set to

“arrive later.”

One of the most celebrated steps associated

with the opening of Salem’s new air station

was when the new commander, William L.

Foley (CG aviator No. 18) flew out to Califor-

nia to retrieve a new Douglas Dolphin twin-

engine amphibious plane for Salem’s use.

Foley had learned to fly in Pensacola, FL,

where he earned the reputation of being a top

pilot and a hero for his role in achieving an

internationally acclaimed rescue mission on

New Year’s Day in January 1933. In stormy

weather conditions, Foley (copilot) and Carl

C. von Paulsen (pilot) spotted and saved a

man adrift in a small wooden skiff.

Yet while landing in a sea with 12-foot waves,

their rescue plane, the Flying Lifeboat PJ-1

Arcturus, was severely damaged. Conse-

quently, they could not fly back to shore and

had to taxi for many miles. Foley, von Paulsen

and three crew members were awarded a Gold

Lifesaving Medal for this achievement, also

d e t a i l e d h e r e : u s c g .mi l / h i s t o r y /

This photo shows the legendary USCG Flying

Lifeboat Arcturus at its Miami, FL, hangar in

the 1930s. LT William L. Foley flew this plane

before becoming first commander of the Coast

Guard Air Station in Salem. (Photo courtesy

of Coast Guard Pterodactyls)

Salem’s Winter Island air station was tied to

many other places — not just to Gloucester

and to Pensacola and other bases in Florida,

but to Coast Guard bases all across the coun-

try. Foley’s mission to California to retrieve

the Dolphin, for example, was part of a larger

operation in which new Douglas aircraft were

also delivered to Biloxi, MS, and Cape May,

NJ.

Foley’s flight with the new Dolphin also took

him from the Douglas factory in Santa

Monica, California, to Miami, FL, and Wash-

ington, D.C. before landing in Salem. It

marked the first transcontinental flight ever to

fly directly to Salem from the West Coast.

Salem has an amazing — but often over-

looked — aviation history. We will explore it

further as 2010, the 75th-anniversary year of

Salem’s Coast Guard Air Station, banks more

into view.

John Goff is the president of Salem Preserva-

Main Prop

21

tion, Inc., a nonprofit organization. He is also

the principal of Historic Preservation & De-

sign, a consulting business. E-mail him at

jgoff@salempreservation.org.

A Christmas Miracle – 1943

By Warren DeLancy, Carpenter’s Mate 3/c, USCG I grew up in Marseilles, a town of 4,592 peo-ple in LaSalle County, IL. I enlisted in the Coast Guard on Armistice Day of 1942 in Chicago, IL. I went through a 29-day boot camp at Curtis Bay, MD, then transferred to Camp Lejeune Marine base in NC for a seven-month Carpenter’s school, learning to repair amphibious boats, etc. After that I transferred to the troop transport USS Aquarius at Nor-folk, VA. Over the next 20 months I would sail over 100,000 miles, halfway around the world to Australia and back, participating in nine invasions, from the Marshall Islands to New Guinea to the Philippines to Okinawa. But on Christmas day 1943, aboard Aquarius in San Diego, CA, I had liberty. I was walking past the Plaza Park in downtown when I thought I recognized a Navy sailor sitting on a bench. I stopped and asked, “Hi, Mac, do you mind if I ask your name and where you’re from?” The sailor replied, “I’m Paul Youngling from Marseilles, IL.” I introduced myself and told him that I too was from Marseilles, IL. I then continued, “Are you waiting for someone?” Paul replied, “Yes, I’m waiting for Buster Denny, who is also from our hometown.” When Buster showed up, I introduced myself, and we three agreed to have a meal and visit the zoo together. But as we walked toward a restaurant we met four Marines who, with

locked arms, were boldly taking up the whole sidewalk. I recognized one of them and, look-ing him in the eye, asked, “Are you Carney Adams, from Marseilles, IL?” The Marine answered, “Yes.” He then pointed to a second Marine and said, “And he’s Paul Beard, from Marseilles, IL.” So we five servicemen—two Marines, two Navy men and one Coast Guardsman—all got together, had a meal, and visited the wonder-ful zoo. We had our picture taken at a penny arcade for one dollar, and sent copies home to our parents. My parents showed the photo to a reporter from the Marseilles, IL, Daily Repub-

lican Times newspaper, and it appeared in January 1944. All five of us were involved in many inva-sions in the Pacific, but thankfully returned home at the end of the war, as did my two brothers, Raymond E. and Clare E. DeLancy, who served in the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Army Air Force. Forwarded courtesy of Fred Herzberg, Foun-

der and Executive Director Emeritus, FCGH

The History of Loran

Over 65 years ago the Coast Guard became involved in the LORAN Program with the assignment of LCDR Lawrence H. Harding as the liaison for the Department of the Navy to the MIT Research Lab. LORAN was devel-oped to meet the need for an all-weather, long-range (500 miles) radionavigation sys-tem with 1 to 2 mile accuracy. In 1940, the MIT Radiation laboratory, under the direction of Mr. Melville Eastham, was tasked with de-veloping such a system. Dr. Alfred Loomis and other great scientists started to develop this system. It has been rumored that its origi-nal name, LRN, referred to “Loomis Radio Navigation.” The project was so secret that even the decision makers did not know the full details of the program. Other radio navi-

Main Prop

22

gation systems were in existence, such as ra-dio beacons and the GEE (a British system); however, they did not meet the range and ac-curacy requirements. The Chief of Naval Operations sent a request to the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard for an experienced senior officer knowledge-able in radio communication and electronics. In May 1942 the CNO approved the selection of LCDR Harding. LCDR Harding is credited with coining the term LORAN – an abbrevia-tion of Long Range Navigation. In June 1942, tests were conducted with two experimental stations, Montauk and Fenwick, which proved the system’s potential. The de-cision was made to expand the system on the U.S. East Coast and the Western North Atlan-tic. Seven stations were put into operation, with very good results. Five of these stations were manned by the U.S. Coast Guard, the others by the Royal Canadian Navy. The Ca-nadian officers in charge were female, and at that time Chatham Monitor Station had an all-female crew. In the European theater campaign, LORAN became a navigational instrument that both the Air Force and Navy deemed invaluable. By the close of the war, LORAN coverage was available over Germany with the use of sky-wave synchronization. The Germans knew of LORAN, had built localized jamming equipment, and were planning to place into service a large jamming transmitter to cover all of Germany in June 1945; however, the war ended in May. In the meantime, the Pacific theater was in need of a long range navigation system as well. The Coast Guard was tasked with meet-ing this requirement. With lessons learned from the North Atlantic, a Construction De-tachment was put into operation. In the Aleu-tian Islands, CD26 was made up of personnel experienced in construction, with part of the construction crew being the first crew of the operational station. This concept proved very

effective as the war advanced throughout the Pacific.

Source unknown

LORA� Signal Termination - LSU Wild-

wood, �J

Originally uploaded by uscgpress Guardians, On Tuesday, 8 February at 1500 EST, domes-tic LORAN C operations ceased as all signals were secured. I joined my fellow LORANi-mals at LORAN Support Unit Wildwood, NJ, to witness the shutdown. I offered CDR Gary Thomas, Commanding Officer of LSU Wild-wood, the opportunity to provide a commen-tary, and his thoughts are provided below. ADM A. (LT Allen, C.O. LORAN Station Lampang, Thailand, 1974-75) Guest Blog by CDR Gary M. Thomas, Com-manding Officer U.S. Coast Guard Loran Support Unit, Wildwood, New Jersey Yesterday, VADM Papp presided over the termination of the Loran C signal transmission after more than 67 years of Coast Guard in-volvement with Loran, in accordance with the President's intent and the 2010 Coast Guard Appropriation law. The Coast Guard's Navi-gation Center (NAVCEN), which was the Op-erational Commander of the Loran C system, was charged with development of the Opera-tions Order to execute the termination of the signal. At 1958Z, CAPT Ed Thiedeman, Com-manding Officer of the NAVCEN, gave the order for all stations to secure transmission of the Loran C signal, bringing to a close the era of radio navigation, during which the United States Coast Guard established the gold stan-dard for engineering, operations and system availability. As the reports confirming signal termination rolled in, starting with the Northeast United

Main Prop

23

States chain and moving from east to west, finally finishing with Alaska, there was more than one person who felt a bit saddened when they heard stations at which they had served call out that the signal had been secured. The securing of the transmitters left an eerie quiet for a system that was known worldwide for its 99.7% system availability and 99.9% system performance. The quiet poignantly marked the end of an era. Admiral Allen, who witnessed the event while at the Loran Support Unit (LSU), had a hand in securing the last signal, when the LSU se-cured its test rate as the last station to broad-cast a Loran C signal for the United States. Standing alongside, and with the assistance of a veteran of Loran A service from the 1950s and two veterans of Loran C service dating back to the 1960s, Admiral Allen threw the switch securing the signal transmission of the 8090 Master Test rate for the final time. Following the securing of the transmitters, celebrations were held at both NAVCEN and the LSU. However, the celebrations were not about securing the signal, but rather to honor the service of the men and women who stood the watch for more than 65 years, from remote places such as Attu, Alaska, so far west that they say "From Here You Can See Tomor-row;" to small islands such as Johnston Island, which had the Loran station and little more; to Havre, Montana, where the tower was the tall-est structure for miles; to Sylt, Germany, and many other European, Mediterranean and Pa-cific countries. It was never the most glamor-ous duty available, but it was one of the most critical, helping our country’s navigation through several wars and showing the civilian community just what could be done with pre-cision position, navigation and timing ser-vices. At the LSU, the event was closed with a sim-ple toast—"To those who stood the watch"—to recognize all who did, and all of the men and women, military and civilian, who sup-ported them.

World War II-era �avigation System Shut-

ting Down

By Mike M. Ahlers, CNN, Monday, February 8, 2010 Washington -- Good night, Loran. In a series of small ceremonies, the U.S. Coast Guard on Monday afternoon will shut down Loran-C, a navigation and timing system that has guided mariners and aviators since World War II. The death blow came last May when President Obama called the system obsolete, saying it is no longer needed in an age in which Global Positioning System devices are nearly ubiqui-tous in cars, planes and boats. Killing Loran-C will save the government $190 million over five years, Obama said. But supporters of Loran -- including the man known as "the father of GPS" -- say the na-tion's increasing reliance on GPS paradoxi-cally has increased the importance of main-taining Loran as a backup. Supporters also argue that the mere existence of Loran makes the GPS satellite system a less attractive target for cyber-thugs, terrorists or future military adversaries. GPS systems today are used not only for navi-gation, but also to provide precise timing for ATM machines, cell phone towers, water plants and other enterprises, and positioning information for precision-guided weapons for the military. GPS disruptions can be costly to business, dangerous for travelers, and debili-tating to the military. Supporters of Loran -- short for LOng RAnge Navigation system -- say the system is a near-perfect backup because it provides similar information to GPS, but has dissimilar infra-structure. GPS is based on a constellation of at least 25 satellites; Loran is based on 24 ground sta-

Main Prop

24

tions in the United States, and others else-where. GPS transmits a very faint signal and is vulnerable to interference or jamming; Lo-ran has a high-power signal which can pene-trate obstacles like foliage and is harder to interrupt. GPS is powered by solar panels; Loran is tied to ground power. And while GPS operates in outer space, outside of controlled perimeters, Loran operates inside controlled perimeters in the United States. The vulnerability of GPS and the conse-quences of an outage became evident in 2007 during a Navy training exercise in the Port of San Diego, California. Participants uninten-tionally jammed GPS signals in the region, shutting down satellite navigation and cell phone service up to 10 miles inland for three hours. The satellite-based system's vulnerability be-came apparent a second time that year, when China tested an anti-satellite weapon, destroy-ing one of its own aging weather satellites. Indeed, in recent years, as the popularity of GPS soared and the number of Loran users dwindled, the fate of the Loran system has followed a meandering path of near-death and rebirth experiences that even the most sophis-ticated navigation system would have diffi-culty tracking. During the Bush administration, the system was at one point placed on the chopping block, but was resurrected amid a flurry of reports from Loran backers. In late 2006, an Independent Assessment Team headed by Bradford Parkinson, known as the "father of GPS," unanimously recom-mended that an enhanced version of Loran, known as eLORAN, "be completed and re-tained as the national backup system for GPS," saying it had "critical safety of life, national and economic security, and quality of life applications." The assessment team recommended that the government complete the eLORAN upgrade

and commit to eLORAN as the national backup to GPS for 20 years. But the Obama administration has described Loran as unnecessary and antiquated. In a May 7 speech, Obama used Loran as an exam-ple of government waste. "This system once made a lot of sense, before there were satellites to help us navigate," Obama said. "Now there's GPS. And yet, year after year, this obsolete technology has contin-ued to be funded even though it serves no government function and very few people are left who still actually use it." So at 3 p.m. Monday, the U.S. Coast Guard will turn off Loran signals at 19 of the 24 Lo-ran stations. Signals will remain at five sta-tions because of agreements with Russia and Canada, but the Coast Guard expects those stations to be decommissioned by June after the United States receives verification that those countries have been notified of the change. The five stations that will temporarily remain online are located in Attu, Alaska; Caribou, Maine; Nantucket, Massachusetts; Shoal Cove, Alaska; and George, Washington. Some congressional critics say it is a mistake to shut down the system. In a November letter to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napoli-tano, two top members of the Senate Home-land Security Committee urged that Loran-C be spared. Deploying an enhanced Loran, or eLORAN, would cost about $100 million, Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Connecticut, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, wrote -- about one half the cost of placing one new GPS satellite in orbit, they said. But the case for dismantling Loran also has its advocates, including the U.S. Coast Guard. In a submission to the Federal Register, the Coast Guard said Loran-C was not established as, nor was it intended to be, a backup for GPS. Other radio navigation systems, or op-erational procedures, can be used as backups

Main Prop

25

for GPS navigation and other critical applica-tions, the Coast Guard said. The Department of Homeland Security says it is currently reviewing the nation's critical in-frastructure "to determine if a single, domestic system is needed as a GPS backup." "The continued active operation of Loran-C is not necessary to advance this evaluation," DHS said. But hope springs eternal for some Loran sup-porters, who hope the Coast Guard will mothball the system rather than destroy it. Mothballing the stations would allow the gov-ernment to resurrect the system if ongoing studies show Loran is the appropriate backup for GPS. But one Loran supporter acknowl-edged that hopes of reviving the system, at this point, may just be "wishful thinking."

Legendary Coast Guardsman Lieuten-

ant Herbert M. Collins Crosses the Bar

Pea Island Surfman Herbert M. Collins

Originally uploaded by uscgpress, Monday, March 15, 2010

Guardians,

Today I announced with regret the passing of

one of our Coast Guard legends, Lieutenant

Herbert M. Collins, USCG (Ret.). Here is the

message shared with the field:

COMDTNOTE 5360 Subj: Death of a Distinguished CG Veteran 1. It is with deep regret that I announce the passing of Lieutenant Herbert M. Collins, USCG (ret.), a legendary Coast Guardsman and the last surviving crewmember of the all-African-American Pea Island Lifesaving Sta-tion. Lieutenant Collins succumbed to cancer

on Sunday evening, March 14th, surrounded

by family and friends.

Main Prop Speakings

F� Heriberto Segovia “Eddie” Hernan-

dez, United States Coast Guard

By Dr. William Thiesen Born: 23 July 1948. Killed in action: 5 De-cember 1968 Heriberto S. Hernandez was a native of San Antonio, Texas, and in July 1965, he enlisted from that city for four years of service in the United States Coast Guard. He served on board the Cutter BERING STRAIT, Loran Station Saipan, Base Galveston and, in the spring of 1968, he deployed for duty in Viet-nam. Beginning in May, Fireman Hernandez, known by his shipmates as “Eddie,” served on board the 82-foot cutter POINT CY-PRESS.

Continued on p27 Continued on p26

26

Main Prop

During his tour in Vietnam, Hernandez participated in numerous combat counter-infiltration patrols against North Vietnamese and Viet Cong commu-nist forces along the coast of the Republic of Viet-nam. He repeatedly volunteered for intelligence-gathering operations in the cutter’s thirteen-foot, outboard-powered small boat, or “skimmer.” These small Boston Whaler-style boats were made of fi-berglass and incorporated neither armor nor any other protection from enemy fire. On 5 December 1968, Hernandez volunteered for yet another small boat mission. This time he piloted the skimmer up the Rach Nang River, near the southern tip of South Vietnam, to scout for Viet Cong waterway escape routes. Also on board the skimmer were LTJG Gordon M. Gillies and CDR Charles L. Blaha. The countryside along the river seemed peaceful, and various structures along the banks appeared deserted. However, as the skimmer turned back to return to the cutter, the three men spotted a Viet Cong militiaman inside a bunker on shore. Hernandez and the others opened fire on the bunker and gunned the engine to evade enemy fire. It was too late, however, as automatic weapons fire opened up from shore and riddled each man in the open boat. All three men were wounded by the enemy fire. The POINT CYPRESS met the skimmer at the mouth of the river, recovered the men and small boat, and proceeded at high speed to medical facilities on the local operations mother ship USS WASHOE COUNTY. Blaha and Gillies sustained serious wounds, but theirs were not life-threatening—unlike Hernandez’s wounds. Hernandez survived the pas-sage from the Rach Nang River to the WASHOE COUNTY, but died just as the POINT CYPRESS approached the naval vessel to moor. For his heroic service, FN Hernandez posthumously received the Purple Heart Medal and the Bronze Star Medal with the Combat “V” device. He is the second Hispanic American service member known to have received this honor. In his citation for the BSM, Vice Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt wrote: “Fireman Hernandez’s heroic actions under enemy fire were instrumental to the success of friendly forces in harassing and destroying the enemy’s mo-rale and feeling of security. Fireman Hernandez’s professional skill, courage under enemy fire, and devotion to duty reflected great credit upon himself, and were in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.”

While Hernandez should be remembered for his heroic service and devotion to duty, he should also be remembered as a Coast Guardsman who was respected, admired and well-liked by his shipmates.

Personal Testimony on Eddie Hernandez

By Alan Dillenbeck, SN/BM3, POINT CYPRESS, 1967‐1968 Eddie's and my deployments overlapped by just a few months. However, working with him made a huge impact on my life. I really don't know why Ed chose to join the Coast Guard; avoiding Viet Nam service certainly was not a factor, as all the enlisted billets were filled by vol-unteers, and there was often a long waiting list. I suspect Ed, like most of us, went to RONONE [Coast Guard Squadron One] for a variety of rea-sons. The Coast Guard in the 60's had little minority representation, but I doubt that was a factor. I think he just wanted to be part of our nation's struggle at that time. I don't have a recollection of his boxing experience, but I always felt better when Ed was with me when we were in a Navy Club. He had a formidable pres-ence. There was no one whom I would have felt more comfortable with watching my back. From left to right, the photo shows me, our VN [South Vietnamese Navy] liaison, a U.S. Navy medic, and Eddie. It was taken on 20 September 1968, after an operation using the 13' Whaler shown in the picture. Ironically, Ed was killed in the same boat a few short months later. A few weeks after the picture was taken, my tour was up and I returned stateside. I think Eddie de-serves recognition; he was a special person.

Continued from p25

27

Continued from p25

2. Lieutenant Collins’ service to the Coast

Guard and our nation alone is significant, es-

pecially in light of the challenges that African

Americans faced as the service was integrated.

Yet his legacy runs even deeper in our collec-

tive heritage as he was also the grand nephew

of Dorman Pugh, one of seven gold lifesaving

medal recipients from the Pea Island rescue of

the crew of the stricken schooner E.S. �ew-

man in 1896. When Lieutenant Collins retired

in 1976, he and his family set the bar for the

longest continuous family service in the Coast

Guard, a record that began with his grandfa-

ther, Joseph H. Berry, in 1880.

3. Born in 1921 in Manteo, North Carolina,

Lieutenant Collins enlisted in the Coast Guard

and attended boot camp in Fort Lauderdale,

Florida. First assigned to the cutter Tallapoosa

in Savannah, Collins served as a mess atten-

dant. He then served at stations from Florida

to Virginia, including aboard cutter Mendota

in Norfolk, VA, alongside renowned author

and Coast Guardsman Alex Haley. Lieutenant

Collins then transferred to the all-African

American lifesaving station at Pea Island

where he served as a surfman for the duration

of World War II. He and his fellow surfmen

carried out vital search and rescue responsi-

bilities and responded to a distressed ship that

had been hit by a torpedo between the Pea

Island and Chicamacomico Coast Guard sta-

tions. In 1947, Lieutenant Collins ended an

historic era in Coast Guard history as he

handed over the keys when the Pea Island sta-

tion was decommissioned. He later received

his commission and was promoted to the rank

of lieutenant before retiring in 1976.

4. After serving in the Coast Guard, Lieuten-

ant Collins continued to be an outstanding

advocate for our service. He shared his per-

sonal experiences and highlighted the proud

history of African Americans who have

served. Photos of Lieutenant Collins and addi-

tional information on Coast Guard African

American history are available here. The ex-

traordinary story of the heroes of Pea Island is

the subject of a new film titled “The Rescue

Men,” to which Lieutenant Collins contrib-

uted. More detail is available at

www.rescuemenfilm.com.

ADM T. W. Allen, Commandant, United

States Coast Guard, sends.

World War II Hero Seymour Wittek Dies

at 88 at Home

By Richard Goldstein

The �ew York Times, Sunday, January 3, 2010 Seymour Wittek, a former Coast Guardsman who helped battle a fire that threatened to dev-astate New York Harbor during World War II, and six decades later gained the recognition he coveted for his unit's heroism, died Wednes-day at a hospital in the Bronx. Mr. Wittek, who lived in Ossining, N.Y., was 88. His death was announced by the Coast Guard. Coast Guardsmen in the New York area dur-ing the Second World War were known deri-sively to some as subway sailors. They would ride the subway in their off-duty hours, visit-ing their dates or heading to Times Square.

Speakings

28

On the evening of April 24, 1943, Seaman Wittek was at his Jersey City barracks await-ing a pass and a chance to see his fiancée, Anne Cooperman, in Brooklyn. The next day was Easter Sunday, when he could put aside his chores loading ammunition and bombs onto freighters at the Caven Point pier in Jer-sey City for shipment to Europe. Just then, a fire erupted beneath the engine room of an old Panamanian freighter, El Es-

tero, berthed at Caven Point and laden with explosives. Two ammunition ships and a line of railroad cars packed with munitions were nearby. More than 5,000 tons of explosives could go off in a chain reaction if the Estero blew up, creating an inferno that might engulf fuel tanks at Bayonne, N.J., and on Staten Is-land, cripple the nation's busiest wartime port, and bring catastrophic damage and casualties. A Coast Guard officer asked for volunteers from the Jersey City barracks to fight the fire, and got 60 of them. "Nobody looked left, no-body looked right, nobody looked back-wards," Mr. Wittek recalled in an interview with The �ew York Times on the 2008 Memo-rial Day weekend. "The men who volunteered all stepped forward—immediately." The Guardsmen rushed to the pier aboard trucks and grabbed hoses and axes while the New York City fireboats Fire Fighter and John J. Harvey as well as Coast Guard vessels doused the freighter. But the fire raged on. A pair of tugboats finally towed the blazing ship into the harbor, with Mr. Wittek among the Coast Guard volunteers still aboard. "I was told to leave when we were not too far from shore because they had too many men, they didn't want to imperil everyone," Mr. Wittek recalled in an interview in June 2008. "There was a picket boat. I went down a lad-der and one of my friends said to me: 'Seymour, take my wallet. If anything hap-pens, at least they'll know I was there.'" Nearly four hours after the fire began, the

weight of the water pouring from fireboats sank the Estero. "We felt that any minute we might be gone, and thank God we got through it safely," Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia told New York-ers in a radio talk the next day. Mr. Wittek, a native of the Bronx, married Ms Cooperman seven weeks later, and his Coast Guard buddy who had tossed him that wallet was a guest at the wedding. Mr. Wittek, who worked in the fur industry after the war, is survived by a daughter, a son, three grandchil-dren and three great-grandchildren. His wife died in 2007. The Coast Guard awarded medals to the sen-ior officers in the Estero episode. The enlisted men, including Mr. Wittek, were honored by the city of Bayonne with a parade and cita-tions, but received no medals from the Coast Guard at the time. And in the daily rush of war news, the near-disaster was soon forgot-ten. Mr. Wittek said that he tried long after-ward to persuade New York City officials to provide a tribute and that a mention of the Estero had been planned for Veterans Day 2001, but was put aside in light of the World Trade Center terrorist attack. "All I want is simple recognition of what the Coast Guard did that day," Mr. Wittek told The Times in spring 2008. Recognition came on Veterans Day 2008 at the Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum in Manhattan when Vice Adm. Robert J. Papp, Jr., presented Mr. Wittek with the Coast Guard Commendation Medal for bravery. The Coast Guard later presented the commenda-tion to at least two other members of Mr. Wit-tek's unit, one posthumously. "Not every act of courage requires you to face bullets," Mr. Wittek remarked on the 2008 Memorial Day weekend. "Those men really put their lives on the line." Provided courtesy of FCGH Chairman VADM

Jim Hull and �orm Paulus

Speakings

29

Charles Johnson, WWII Veteran, Facilities

Chief at UMass Lowell

By Stefanie Geisler, Boston GLOBE Two days before his 23rd birthday, Charles "Jigger" Johnson and his fellow Coast Guards-men were landing off Luzon in the Philip-pines. Mortar shells tore through the air, and flames erupted on the water around their boat. One of Mr. Johnson's shipmates was knocked overboard. Without hesitation, Mr. Johnson plunged into the water to save him. He later received the Silver Star for displaying "exceptional courage, skill, initiative, and de-votion to duty" on that day in 1945. ''It was a whole different species of people back then," said his son Lyndon of Pepperell. "I'm sure he wasn't thinking about how his birthday was coming up or anything like that. I'm sure he was just thinking that one of his men was in the water, and he just jumped in to save him.” Mr. Johnson, who went on to a 38-year career at Lowell Technological Institute, then its suc-cessor, the University of Massachusetts at Lowell, rising to superintendent of buildings and grounds, died April 20 at Saints Medical Center in Lowell of complications of cancer. He was 88. Mr. Johnson was born in Lowell and attended public schools there. As a teenager, he earned his nickname because he wore sneakers with the name of a popular baseball player at the time, Arnold "Jigger" Statz, on the back, his son said. Mr. Johnson joined the Coast Guard in the early 1940s. He served aboard the USS Cava-

lier during World War II. He rarely mentioned his service, let alone his Silver Star, his family said. "He never really bragged about things," Lyndon said. "It was just in his closet, up on the top shelf.” "He just thought it was his duty to serve his country,” added his son Timothy of Chelmsford. He was honorably discharged

in December 1945. In the late 194Os, Mr. Johnson met Eileen (Bailey). They married in 1950 and would have celebrated their 60th anniversary April 30. Mr. Johnson began working as a janitor at Lowell Technological Institute in the late 1950s. He was promoted to stockroom man-ager and then superintendent of buildings and grounds. Over his career he managed and ran more than 30 buildings, his family said. His interest in building and fixing things made him a good fit for the job. "The biggest thing everybody knew about my father was that he always had a million projects going on,” Timothy Johnson said. Mr. Johnson also did multiple additions and repairs to the family's Chelmsford home. When he bought the house in 1950, it had four rooms, said his son John of Chelmsford. "It's got about 11 rooms now,” he said. "He just kept having kids and build-ing rooms. He always loved a project.”

Supplied by Alban Landry and Fred Herzberg

The following item was hand-written on the

back page of the most recent Cutter and

mailed back to me. — Ed.

“Dear Capt. Ayer, just a note to let you know that my husband Arthur passed away last year so there is no need to continue sending the newsletter, the Cutter. My husband loved the Coast Guard & if he was still here he probably would want to help you. He was 90 years old & in failing health but sure perked up whenever the subject of the USCG was mentioned. Thank you for serving our country and keep-ing me free. My thoughts and prayers are with you to stay safe and healthy. With fond regards, Mrs. Arthur Frenzel (Mary Lou).”

Speakings

30

1st Fast Response Cutter �amed for USCG Enlisted Hero

BER�ARD C. WEBBER

SENTINEL Cutter Originally uploaded by uscgpress

Mr. Kennedy Awarded Meritorious Public

Service Award for CG36500 Restoration

The Commandant of the United States Coast Guard with great pleasure presented the Coast Guard Meritorious Public Service Award to Mr. Peter Kennedy on March 19, 2010, for his signifi-cant contributions to the preservation and celebra-tion of Coast Guard history. Recognizing the remarkable design and truly historic performance of legendary Coast Guard Motor Lifeboat CG36500, famous for its heroic 1952 rescue by Mr. Bernie Webber and crew of 32 mariners from the grounded SS Pendleton amidst a ferocious

nor'easter, Mr. Kennedy endeavored to completely restore the rescue craft. He led a team of talented and dedicated Orleans Historical Society volun-teers on a tireless mission to convert the weather-exposed, dilapidated hull of the decommissioned CG36500 back to full operational capability. Through countless hours of detailed workmanship, dedicated research to replicate the craft’s original configuration and thousands of dollars of donated funds, CG36500 emerged from a series of over-

hauls to become a floating museum and the only

fully-restored and operational 36-footer from its class of 132 boats built at the Curtis Bay Yard. Demonstrating exceptional enthusiasm, Mr. Ken-nedy and other volunteers have continued to main-tain CG36500 as an educational and inspirational exhibit for the entire Coast Guard and our Nation.

Mr. Truman Strobridge Receives Distinguished

Public Service Award

Courtesy of the MCPO-CG Blogsite. Posted by Skip Bowen. Thursday, March 4, 2010.

Message Board

Guardians,

It is with great pleasure that I announced today that the name of the first Fast Response Cutter in the Sentinel Class will be the BERNARD C. WEB-BER. It is named for Petty Officer First Class Bernie Webber, who executed one of the most famous rescues in U.S. Coast Guard history. He piloted Motor Lifeboat CG-36500 from Station Chatham, MA, to the freighter Pendleton, which had split in half during a massive storm in 1952. Webber and his three crewmembers rescued 32 sailors from certain death. Later the Coast Guard crewmen were awarded the Gold Life Saving Medal for their courage and heroism. CWO BOSN (retired) Bernie Webber passed away last year and was interred at Wellfleet, MA, on Cape Cod in

May.

With great pride I also announce that all of the 58 Sentinel Class cutters will be named after enlisted heroes. In the words of Alexander Hamilton, "a few armed vessels judiciously stationed at the en-trance to our ports, might be useful sentinels of the law." Our cutters will be named after our enlisted "sentinels" ... not only of the law, but of safety of life at sea as well. A formal keel-laying ceremony will take place for the first FRC on April 9th in

Lockport, LA, at the Bollinger Shipyard.

ADM Thad W. Allen, Commandant

31

Guest Post by Dr. Dennis Noble, MSTCS, U.S. Coast Guard (Ret.) On 24 February the Commandant and MCPO-CG Bowen took time out of their very busy schedules to drive to the National Archives to present Mr. Truman R. Strobridge with the U.S. Coast Guard's Distinguished Public Service Award. The Com-mandant presented the award just before a program on a book that Mr. Strobridge helped coauthor: Captain "Hell Roaring" Mike Healy: From Ameri-

can Slave to Arctic Hero. This award took Mr. Strobridge completely by surprise—which shows that even Washington, D.C., can sometimes keep secrets. Mr. Strobridge has accomplished much to preserve the heritage of the U.S. Coast Guard. He held the position of Historian of the U.S. Coast Guard from 1970 until 1976, the first to fill that position since the end of World War II. During his tenure, with-out any staff, he wrote numerous articles, began

the historical monograph series, and ably repre-sented the Service in historical matters in the aca-demic world and to the other military services and general public. He has always been willing to share his knowledge of the Service. His biography reads: “Truman R. Strobridge worked as an archi-

vist and historian in the federal government for more than thirty years and has held positions with the National Archives, Army, Marine Corps, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and unified combatant commands in Alaska, Europe, and the Pacific. He was the Historian of the U.S. Coast Guard from 1970 to 1976. Early in his career he served in the merchant marine and the U.S. Army Air Force in World War II. He holds degrees in geography and history and has taught at the University of Alaska. He is the author of nearly one hundred articles and four books. He resides in Alexandria, Virginia.” It is because of Mr. Strobridge that I began re-searching and writing history. For over thirty-six years he has continued to be a mentor and some-one I can always count on to learn more about his-torical matters. Photographs (c) Bruce Guthrie, by permission.

Hall Of Heroes

By LT Allison Dussault, Delta Company Officer, USCGA On Friday 23 April 2010 the annual induction of new honorees into the Hall of Heroes took place in New London. The following are condensed ver-sions of the longer citations that accompanied each presentation:

Clarence H. Peterson, CAPT USCG, C’25: Silver

Star Medal -- as Commander of a Task Unit of Landing Ships Tanks (LSTs) during action against enemy Japanese forces at Cape Gloucester, New Britain, on December 26, 1943 and at Saidor, New Guinea, on January 2, 1944. Subjected to a wither-ing hostile air attack during departure from the beach at Cape Gloucester, Captain Peterson fought his command aggressively and inflicted severe losses upon the enemy with a minimum of damage to his own units, skillfully organizing and guiding succeeding echelons throughout the vital resupply of these two important strongholds, successfully coordinating and executing the movements of his task group and carrying out his hazardous missions without the loss of a single ship. [Captain Peterson also earned a Bronze Star for his actions while commanding a unit of 36 LSTs in the South Pa-cific. Captain Peterson retired at the rank of Rear Admiral after more than 30 years of service.] Richard L. Burke, LT USCG, C’27: Distinguished

The Message Board:

32

VADM Howard Thorsen, Founder & Chairman Emeritus - CAPT Fred Herzberg, Founder & Exec. Dir. Emeritus - CAPT Phil Volk - CAPT Donna Cottrell - LT Neil Ruenzel - Prof. C. Douglas Kroll, PhD - CWO Sandy Schwaab

Chairman VADM Jim Hull Treasurer LCDR Richard Batson Chair, Awards Committee John Galluzzo

Vice Chair, Exec. Director CDR Gary Thomas Webmaster & Membership RMC Bob Craig Cutter Editor CAPT Robert Ayer, PhD

Foundation Volunteers

Cutter Production Douglas O’Dell

Board of Regents

Flying Cross -- On 13 June, 1933, LT Burke pi-loted the seaplane ADHARA from the Coast Guard Air Station at Gloucester, MA, to the fish-ing trawler SHAWMUT through fog and rain to rescue a severely injured seaman. Navigating solely on radio bearings due to the adverse weather, LT Burke deftly piloted the seaplane to a position 130 miles offshore. Once on scene, heavy swells around the vessel made the landing and takeoff of the seaplane exceedingly perilous. Nonetheless LT Burke successfully landed the seaplane, loaded the injured seaman onto the plane and took off enroute to Boston airport, saving the seaman’s life due to prompt medical attention. [LT Burke was a Coast Guard aviation pioneer who later served as the Chief, Aviation Division of the Coast Guard before retiring at the rank of Captain after more than 20 years of service.] Charles F. Scharfenstein, LCDR USCG, C’41:

Bronze Star Medal (with Combat Distinguishing

Device “V”) -- For heroic service as Commanding Officer of USS LCI(L) 87, flagship of LCI(L) Flo-tilla TEN, during the initial invasion on the coast of France, June 6, 1944. Under heavy enemy fire, then-LT Scharfenstein took station close to shore early in the morning of D-Day and, throughout the bitterest part of the fighting, efficiently assisted in the reorganization, grouping and dispatching of craft to the beach. During the night, displaying expert shiphandling, he maneuvered his ship close to the beach in an effort to maintain the flow of men, ammunition and supplies despite the danger of enemy gunfire, air attack, submerged mined obstacles and sunken wrecks. [LCDR Scharfen-stein also served in anti-submarine and coastal protection patrols at various stations on the eastern seaboard and went on to serve as the Eleventh Dis-trict Chief of Staff before retiring at the rank of Captain after 30 years of service.]

�orman C. Venzke, CDR USCG, C’50: Legion of

Merit (with Combat Distinguishing Device “V”):

For service as Fourth Coastal Zone Advisor, Com-mander Gulf of Thailand Surveillance Group and Commander Coast Guard Division ELEVEN from 6 April 1967 to 4 April 1968. Under his able and inspiring leadership, Navy and Coast Guard ves-sels compiled an impressive record in MARKET TIME counter-infiltration operations and in sup-port of friendly forces ashore. By use of small boats and shore observation teams, Commander Venzke extended the scope of coastal surveillance operations into previously inaccessible areas. By maintaining continual liaison with all United States and Republic of Vietnam forces in his area of re-sponsibility and by making maximum use of all forces under his operational control, he was able to provide urgently needed naval gunfire and logistic support to these forces ashore. His outstanding ability to work with people of other services and other nations led to significant improvements in operations of Vietnamese Navy forces and estab-lishment of a combined program for training Viet-namese crews in operation of Navy patrol craft. He was constantly alert to improve material and security conditions at An Thoi, and his persever-ance and ingenuity led to major improvements in the airfield and piers, thereby permitting supplies to move in and out efficiently. He worked closely with advisors to the prisoner of war camp and in-stituted a plan whereby his naval units provided effective gunfire support to the camp in the event of an attack. [CDR Venzke later served as Chief of Operations before retiring at the rank of Rear Admiral after 35 years of service.] Thomas W. Finnegan, LCDR USCG, C’57: Distin-

guished Flying Cross -- While participating in ae-rial flight on 31 December 1968 as pilot of a Coast Guard HH-52A helicopter, engaged in the rescue of a stranded hunter from Sand Island, near Bridal Veil, OR. Blowing snow, 65-knot winds, poor visi-bility and air temperatures near zero prevented a

Memorials

33

rescue by vessel or helicopter on the first day. On the second day, despite continuously severe weather, LCDR Finnegan hovered the aircraft be-tween 10 and 50 feet above the Columbia River and air taxied to the island, navigating by spotting surface aids. On the second pass, one man was sighted leaning against a tree with the other hunter in a prone position. Lacking a clear area to hoist in the vicinity of the victims, he skillfully maneu-vered the helicopter approximately 60 yards up-wind and hovered while the copilot was lowered to the ground. Constantly searching for a hoisting area, he maneuvered downwind while his crewman guided the copilot to the location of the men by hand signals. Locating a clearing about 50 yards further downwind, the copilot was again guided by hand signals to this spot, in company with the lone survivor, who was suffering from severe exposure and frostbite in both legs. LCDR Finnegan held his position despite the severe weather while the hunter was hoisted to safety. After ascertaining that the other hunter had died and the copilot was safely hoisted, LCDR Finnegan departed the scene, flying in heavy ice and rapidly deteriorating weather, having displayed expert airmanship, dauntless valor, aeronautical skill, courage, sound judgment and unwavering devotion to duty throughout this perilous mission. [LCDR Finnegan retired at the rank of Commander after 20 years of service.] David C. Brostrom, LTJG USCG, C’63: Bronze

Star Medal (with Combat Distinguishing Device

“V”) posthumously -- For service as Commanding Officer of USCGC POINT WELCOME, a unit attached to Division TWELVE, Coast Guard Squadron ONE, from 29 April to 11 August 1966. During this time PT WELCOME, assigned to the U.S. Navy Coastal Surveillance Force engaged in Operation MARKET TIME, conducted vigilant and aggressive patrols along the hostile northern coastline of the Republic of Vietnam to prevent infiltration of forces and supplies to the Viet Cong. By his outstanding leadership and inspiring devo-tion to duty, LTJG Brostrom was directly instru-mental in developing the highly disciplined and efficiently trained crew which gallantly sustained the mistaken and tragic attack by three friendly aircraft during the early morning hours of 11 Au-gust 1966. Despite the fact that not one man on board escaped injury from the intense machine-gun fire, the cutter’s surviving crew of nine men car-ried out their duties in accordance with the high standard and esprit established by LTJG Brostrom and saved the vessel from destruction. [LTJG

Brostrom was killed in the line of duty on 11 Au-gust 1966.] Roger W. Hassard, LT USCG, C’63: Bronze Star

Medal (with Combat Distinguishing Device “V”) -

- For heroic achievement in connection with opera-tions against the enemy while serving as Com-manding Officer, USCGC POINT GAMMON from March 1966 to March 1967. On 1 January 1967, while on MARKET TIME patrol in the South China Sea off An Xuyen Province, PT GAMMON intercepted radio traffic from an in-shore patrol PCF which had engaged and been partially disabled by an infiltrating enemy steel-hulled trawler. PT GAMMON immediately pro-ceeded to the scene, detected, closed with and challenged the trawler. PCF 68 arrived on scene almost simultaneously with PT GAMMON, and as PT GAMMON illuminated the trawler and PCF 68 fired warning shots, the trawler took PCF 68 under fire. A running firefight ensued, with the enemy vessel taking both PT GAMMON and PCF 68 under intense machine gun fire. In a team effort, both units raked the enemy with .50-caliber ma-chine gun fire, and with PT GAMMON providing mortar illumination, PCF 68 took the trawler under direct mortar fire, setting the enemy afire with a direct hit. As a result of damage inflicted by the patrol units, the flaming enemy trawler exploded and sank. This outstanding action was success-fully prosecuted without personnel casualties or damage to PT GAMMON. Further actions con-ducted by PT GAMMON resulted in a number of hostile junks destroyed, several enemy structures destroyed and damaged, and other significant losses to the enemy. [LT Hassard went on to obtain advanced degrees in electrical engineering and business administration and served in numerous electrical engineering positions with an emphasis in radionavigation (LORAN-C). Lieutenant Hassard retired at the rank of Commander.] Arthur E. Katz, LTJG USCG, C’63: Bronze Star

Medal (with Combat Distinguishing Device “V”) -

- For service as Commanding Officer, USCGC POINT CYPRESS, a unit attached to Division THIRTEEN, Coast Guard Squadron ONE from December 1965 to September 1966. On 24 March 1966, the PT CYPRESS engaged a Viet Cong junk attempting to cross the Soi Rap River. During the ensuing firefight, seven Viet Cong were killed in action and three captured, along with a quantity of small arms, ammunition and documents. On 16 June 1966, LTJG Katz obtained permission to con-duct a radar surveillance patrol off the mouth of

Memorials

34

the Co Chien River. During the early morning hours, three junks were detected. The junks were then illuminated and warning shots were fired across the bow of the lead junk. A vicious firefight ensued, with the PT CYPRESS in the middle of it. By utilizing the PT CYPRESS as strategically as possible, LTJG Katz was able to bring all five .50-caliber mounts to bear on all three junks. The well-disciplined and accurate fire by PT CYPRESS severely damaged two of the junks and caused the total destruction of the third junk, which blew up with a tremendous secondary explosion. Three Viet Cong were killed during this action. Both of these outstanding performances were accom-plished without personnel casualties to U.S. forces. [LTJG Katz resigned his commission in 1967. Mr. Katz is the Chief Executive Officer of his own executive recruiting company in Atlanta, GA, and sits on the boards of several nonprofit organiza-tions.] Charles B. Mosher, LTJG USCG, C’63: Silver Star

Medal -- For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Commanding Officer, USCGC POINT GREY (WPB 82324), Coast Guard Squadron ONE, engaged in MARKET TIME operations to interdict Viet Cong infiltration attempts around the mouth of the Co Chien River on 10 May 1966. While on patrol, PT GREY de-tected a trawler, later discovered to be carrying over 100 tons of ammunition, arms, and supplies to Viet Cong forces, and forced her to ground in shoal water close to shore. For several hours PT GREY laid down an effective, intermittent barrage along the shore to prevent Viet Cong forces from removing the trawler’s cargo. LTJG Mosher twice drove his cutter through a withering blast of enemy gunfire in attempts to put a boarding party on the trawler. He ceased these valiant attempts to secure the trawler only after three of his crewmembers were wounded. He then joined with newly arrived friendly forces in destroying the enemy vessel and confiscating part of its cargo. [LTJG Mosher re-tired at the rank of Lieutenant Commander in 1983 and served more than 21 years as a Coast Guard civilian in the Aids to Navigation Division in Headquarters, retiring in 2005 after a total of 47 years of Government service.]

Barham F. Thomson, III, LTJG USCG, C’63: Sil-

ver Star Medal -- For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in action while serving as Commanding Officer, USCGC POINT SLOCUM (WPB 82313), Coast Guard Squadron ONE, engaged in MAR-KET TIME operations to interdict Viet Cong infil-

tration attempts around the mouth of the Co Chien River on 20 June 1966. PT SLOCUM went to the assistance of Coast Guard Cutter PT LEAGUE, which was engaged in a fierce firefight with a ves-sel attempting to infiltrate 100 tons of arms and ammunition to the Viet Cong. Upon arrival on the scene, LTJG Thomson found that the infiltrator had been forced aground by PT LEAGUE and that Viet Cong forces concealed on the shore were at-tempting to drive off the cutter so that the cargo could be retaken. When friendly air support ar-rived, he made passes close to the shoreline in or-der to draw enemy fire and force the Viet Cong to disclose their positions to the aircraft. During these valiant maneuvers, PT SLOCUM received several hits from small arms fire and two near misses from recoilless rifles. When the grounded trawler was set afire, LTJG Thomson put PT SLOCUM along-side and extinguished the fire. His bravery and skill in risking his vessel, first to draw the enemy fire and then to save the captured ship and its cargo, greatly contributed to the United States ef-forts against insurgent forces in the Republic of Vietnam. [LTJG Thomson retired at the rank of Captain after more than 20 years of service.] Harry J. Godfrey, III, LTJG USCG, C’67: Bronze

Star Medal (with Combat Distinguishing Device

“V”) -- For meritorious service while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in armed conflict against the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong com-munist aggressors in the Republic of Vietnam from September 1969 to August 1970. While serving as Commanding Officer of United States Coast Guard Cutter POINT CYPRESS, LTJG Godfrey partici-pated in numerous MARKET TIME patrols and engaged the enemy on seventeen occasions. His aggressive leadership, initiative and sound judg-ment made his vessel a highly effective combat unit which carried out all phases of MARKET TIME operations. While averaging over seventy percent time underway, he traveled over fourteen thousand miles in counter-infiltration patrols aimed at preventing the transportation of enemy men and materiel at sea by conducting board-and-search operations of numerous junks and sampans, apprehending 49 Viet Cong suspects. He con-stantly pursued the enemy and inflicted heavy losses on them during eighty-nine naval gunfire support missions, which resulted in 107 enemy structures and 64 sampans damaged or destroyed. When his vessel was selected for Vietnamization, he skillfully directed the small craft assets training and turnover of resources program, culminating in that unit being transferred to the Vietnamese Navy.

Memorials

35

[LTJG Godfrey resigned his commission in 1971 and subsequently served 25 years as a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. He is a 1986 graduate of the National War College.] James A. McEwen, LCDR USCG, C’80: Distin-

guished Flying Cross -- LCDR McEwen is cited for extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight on 21 November 1994 while serving as Aircraft Commander and On Scene Commander aboard HH-65A helicopter CGNR 6588. The air-crew was launched from Air Station Corpus Christi to rescue three severely burned victims from an exploded oil rig 30 miles offshore of Cor-pus Christi. The explosion turned the rig into a mass of twisted, burning metal, making it impossi-ble to land on the rig’s severely damaged helipad, requiring LCDR McEwen to hoist the rescue swimmer and victims from a precarious position between the rig’s crane and the still-burning re-mains of the destroyed helipad. Lieutenant Com-mander McEwen bravely maneuvered the helicop-ter into position with its radome just inches away from the crane and the fenestron tucked under the helipad, the rotor arc within a few feet of the crane’s arm. LCDR McEwen pushed the aircraft to its limits in a 150-foot, high-gross-weight, rock-steady hover, allowing the flight mechanic to place the rescue swimmer aboard the rig and subse-quently retrieve one of the victims from the burn-ing wreckage. Immediately after the flight me-chanic maneuvered the very large victim into the cabin, LCDR McEwen directed another aircraft into position and departed the scene to deliver the badly burned victim to the local trauma center. He quickly refueled and returned to the scene to again weave the helicopter into the same dangerous and precarious position to hoist the last victim. LCDR McEwen’s actions, aeronautical skill, valor, cour-age, judgment and devotion to duty were instru-mental in the rescue of three people. [LCDR McE-wen retired at the rank of CDR after 20 years of service, having been stationed aboard CGC Duane, Naval Air Training Pensacola, Air Station Brook-lyn, CG Aviation Training Center Mobile, Air Sta-tion Corpus Christi, and Air Station Traverse City.]

Culbertson Added to �ational Law Enforce-

ment Memorial

BM1 Edgar Culbertson lost his life during a rescue in Duluth, MN, in1967. [See item in newsletter #27, Summer 2009 Cutter.] As noted in that arti-

cle, in May 2009 in Duluth Culberson was honored not only as a Coast Guardsman but as a fallen po-lice officer as well. Subsequently he was honored in May 2010 by being added to the National Law Enforcement Memorial in DC during Police Week. Police Week activities actually consist of several organizations hosting different events all week long, each being hosted separately yet working in concert with each other. Culberson was included in the Law Enforcement United Bike Tour at the Pen-tagon 9-11 Memorial, a Candlelight Vigil at the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial, and the National Memorial Service on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol. In the Bike Tour, MEC Jason Kooken of USCG Sector Boston and other officers “rode for BM1” over three days, with the ride completing at the 9-11 Memorial at the Pentagon. The riders raised money all year long for COPS (Concerns of Police Survivors), dedicating their fundraising in honor of a particular fallen officer, then riding in honor of that officer, wearing a wrist band with that offi-cer’s name. At the conclusion of the ride the survi-vors meet these riders and are presented with the wrist band from the ride; this event is quite mov-ing, as it is usually the first and only time they will meet the survivors.

Information provided by ME1 Kevin Rofidal

Memorials

On May 13th at the �ational Law Enforcement

Memorial in Judiciary Square in Washington,

D.C., Cris Culbertson-Alpert and Casey Culbert-

son are escorted by ME1 Rofidal within a crowd of

20,000 officers and survivors.

36

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION U.S. POSTAGE PAID Mt. Clemens, MI 48043

PERMIT NO. 374

43324 Nebel Trail Clinton Twp, MI 48038

The Foundation for Coast Guard History

RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED